Vaccinating 12-year-olds against cervical cancer HPV strains.

The_Minister

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0805/cancer.html

The Irish Cancer Society has welcomed the announcement that the HSE has been asked to prepare a vaccination programme against the virus which causes cervical cancer.

The Government has requested that the HSE prepare to introduce the programme for all 12-year-old girls from September next year.

However, the ICS said it was disappointed that there would not be a catch up programme for girls aged 13 to 15.

AdvertisementSpeaking onRTÉ Radio's News At One, Minister for Health Mary Harney said such a catch up scheme could not be put in place at this stage because of budget restrictions.

The Minister said that this was due to the demands of other health programmes such as breast screening and colo-rectal screening.

Ms Harney said it was important that there is a high uptake among those eligible for the programme to be successful.

A vaccine for Human Papilloma Virus or HPV has been available for private patients since 2006.

It costs around €600 for the three doses required.

Women's health experts and the Minister for Health have emphasised the need for continuing use of smear tests to reduce the incidence of cervical cancer.

Cervical cancer is (worldwide) the fith most deadly cancer in women.
About 70% of cases are caused by HPV strains.
The vaccines are nearly completely effective at preventing the lesions that the virus causes, which lead to cancer.

So this move could pretty much kick one of the most deadly cancers down the list to being one of the rarest.
Except that a certain other well-known Irish bulletin board was discussing it, and there were a load of people saying that it was a bad idea. Because it encourages promiscuity, and some people believe vaccines are evil things made up by "Big Pharma".

Does anyone here oppose it?

EDIT: And does anyone else think that this might end up being a ****storm against Harney?

Guy:Incognito

The_Minister wrote: »

EDIT: And does anyone else think that this might end up being a ****storm against Harney?

Therell always be people that will moan about everything. Them coupeld with the gullible fools who'll believe anythign is enough to make a noise. Listening to various radio stations over the last day or so and people were giving out that it wont be given to all girls, saying that MAry Harney should resign because of that. It was said when released that the budget was there to give it to all 12 year old girls. Are people looking for MAry HArney to go get a loan for 20 pr 30 million from her bank and immunise people personnally. At the end of the day there are budgets for everything. They will never cover everythign that everyone wants regardless of how big they are. The simpel fact is that if every girl is to get the injection, some other area of health will suffer more than it already is.

The health service could announce tomorow that it has a pill to cure aids, cancer and parkinsons and that it will eb given away for free yet a certain element will whinge and moan.

As for encouraging promiscuity, I'd imagine that was either fed fromt he church or by a god bothering group. Everything apart from Castration and sewing women up promotes promiscuity and is evil to some people.

meglome

The idea that this vaccine would encourage promiscuity is utter utter crap. Young people are having plenty of sex and I'd be surprised if 1% of them were worried about having sex on the basis of getting this cancer in the future.

I really like to see the cost against the benefits. I don't want to sound cold about this but everything in the health service costs money and I'd like to know it's being well spent (Not that it is knowing our health service), maybe it would be better spent elsewhere? I think I remember from the British media that this vaccine was very expensive compared to other vaccines.

MagicMarker

Tis a good thing, shame that it won't be given to 13-15 year olds... In fact, that just sucks donkey's balls.

'Sorry kids, you'll have to just hope and pray that you don't get it, because we can't afford to help you out''

The_Minister

When looking at costs, don't forget:
1. Eventually we will have to treat less cervical cancer patients.
2. We won't have to have as many smear tests (although that won't be for a generation, till most are vaccinated.
3. The intangable, but very real benefit of people not having to go through the trauma of cancer in the first place.
4. General costs of beds etc.

Dudess

Yep, encouraging promiscuity - what a load of arse. Really young kids are having sex whether we like it or not, so therefore wouldn't it make sense for them to be protected? Condemning this vaccine on that basis is ostrich-like.

I find the idea of 13 and 14-year-old children having sex most unpalatable but I'd prefer the above initiative rather than these same kids not having a notion about contraception and STDs and having unsafe sex.

tribulus

Just in case people didn't know there's a thread about this in the Ladies Lounge with some interesting contributions from r3nu4l.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055349520

The_Minister

I didn't see the LL thread.

humanji

If it stops me catching something off them, then I'm all for it.

Toto Wolfcastle

I was wondering why people were opposing it. Promiscuity? F*ck that.

"Sorry daughter, I wont vaccinate you against the 5th most deadly cancer in women because I think it promotes promiscuity."

People are idiots.

togster

janeybabe wrote: »

I was wondering why people were opposing it. Promiscuity? F*ck that.

"Sorry daughter, I wont vaccinate you against the 5th most deadly cancer in women because I think it promotes promiscuity."

People are idiots.

So true

SimpleSam06

Why would anyone have a problem with promiscuity?

Nevyn

MagicMarker wrote: »

Tis a good thing, shame that it won't be given to 13-15 year olds... In fact, that just sucks donkey's balls.

'Sorry kids, you'll have to just hope and pray that you don't get it, because we can't afford to help you out''

IF parents want they can pay to have their virgin teens vaccinated.

Gran Hermano

Nice to see the Irish governement spending more money on female-health
issues. I'd be happy to see even half the resources/budget spent on
womens health spent on mens health.

My understanding is whilst more women in Ireland get cancer more men in
Ireland die from cancer. Compare the advertising and screening for breast
cancer compared to breast cancer and you can easily see the inequality.

4Xcut

Have to agree with the above, there is very little informmation being promoted along with a total lack of encouraement to get checked for men. Now usually I am the last one to be in favour of the government getting involved with something that should be a persons own responsibility but in this case there are a lot of guys who don't know much about risks or the fact that it is much more manageable the earlier its caught.

On Topic: This vacination program is a great idea, it's giving a group of people the chance not to catch a deadly cancer. Granted some aren't getting it free but there's only so much money there as was said above.

It doesn't promote promiscuity. I would say this is very far down the list of worries people have, especially young teenagers. It's not a get out of all consequences free card that allows them to do what they like, it simply eliminates a certain risk.

Sealbelts don't encourage dangerour driving, vacinations don't encourage promiscuity.

javaboy

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Why would anyone have a problem with promiscuity?

It's a bit scary the way some people leap on a good thing and try to see the bad in it. I'd say this is one of the last STIs that kids think about before having sex. If they do actually think about STIs at all, I'd say it's the likes of HIV, Chlamydia, herpes and the like.

Actually if you think about the logic of the objectors it boils down to "Sexually transmitted infections are the last line of defence against teen promiscuity". The very idea that anyone could see STIs as a 'good thing' is pretty horrifying.

Vertakill

There's a lot of misunderstanding about this and a lot of the usual Irish nature to complain about absolutely everything, even when it's a positive thing.

I don't see HOW this would encourage promiscuity at all. This is a safeguard for the kids' future against a path to cervical cancer. This doesn't mean that once you're vaccinated that you're Superwoman. You still face the same possibilities for the other range of STI's and all that comes with it.

They've obviously done some research into this and figured that over 13+ is probably the earliest some girls will become sexually active, so vaccinating the 12 year olds will eliminate the risk of wasting* a vaccination on a girl where it's unlikely to work because she's already got HPV.

* I say waste because that's exactly what it would be if the vaccination was going out to a range of kids that are already sexually active and have contracted HPV. At €600 a pop, I'm sure there'd be people screaming bloody murder at the rise in taxes to fund this - but these would also be the same people bleeting "what about the 13 and overs!?!".

meglome wrote: »

I really like to see the cost against the benefits. I don't want to sound cold about this but everything in the health service costs money and I'd like to know it's being well spent (Not that it is knowing our health service), maybe it would be better spent elsewhere?

That's exactly what it's about. The older age group that people want the vaccine given to, the more money and the less effective.

scottledeuce

humanji wrote: »

If it stops me catching something off them, then I'm all for it.

So what you saying is you do 12 year olds:eek:

:D

javaboy

scottledeuce wrote: »

So what you saying is you do 12 year olds:eek:

:D

Well done. You've gone and ruined a perfectly good joke (well a sick joke actually ) by explaining it. Bold corner.

andrew

AARRRGH

Nearly every sexually active person has HPV. I was told this by the doctors in St. James's GUIDE clinic (i.e. the sex disease clinic.)

I think the vaccine is a good idea.

Note: HPV is symptomless in over 95% of cases. That's why you don't know you have it.
Note 2: Condoms offer little protection against HPV.

The_Minister

andrew wrote: »

I think they are all going nuts over on another website, lets call it P.ie.:rolleyes:

The sad thing is, if this went to the Dail then Harney would probably lose.

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

The_Minister

Solitaryman666 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

As children get older, the % already infected increases, meaning that the vaccine becomes less and less cost efficient. Ideally it would cover those age groups but the State coffers are pretty much empty, they are calling an emergency budget, the money just isn't there.

AARRRGH

Solitaryman666 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Going without the vaccine or going without sex because they don't have the vaccine?

The_Minister

So, just a final check before this sinks into oblivion.

Does ANYONE oppose this?

Or is it just three weirdos on another board.

kowloon

The_Minister wrote: »

So, just a final check before this sinks into oblivion.

Does ANYONE oppose this?

Or is it just three weirdos on another board.

I will, but ony to save the thread.
It's a terrible thing and I don't like it, not at all.
Turning the nations female youth into nothing but a band of rovig whores I say. Wait 'till Jesus hears about this.