<p>Thanks, Mollie.</p>
<p>It was my understanding that DES (diethylstilbesterol) was a an estrogenic chemical that was never patented, was produced by over 200 different companies, and was FDA approved for postmenapausal replacement, vaginitis and prostate cancer. It was used off label to prevent miscarraiges, and no clinical trials were ever done to support its use. It was used empirically, until studies eventually showed it did nothing to prevent miscarraiges. Finally, it was linked to adenocarcinoma of the vagina in teens, among other problems. If the FDA did approve its use in pregnancy, it was not based on any research. Back then, if you used a drug for a certain indication, eventually you could ask for FDA approval. If DES did gain FDA approval, it was not through the use of clinical trials. That we know. That was the whole problem with DES–it was “just done” with little to no science to back it up. It was a disaster.</p>
<p>sunnyflorida: DES was certainly a disaster; however, it was FDA approved in 1947 for use in pregnancy (according to the article I provided above); it was FDA approved for the other uses you mentioned in 1941. Despite studies done, it was not until 1971 that the FDA issued an alert about its use during pregnancy. </p>
<p>Certainly, the prime (only?) motivator for a drug company is money; Merck stands to make at least $1 billion (at least) off of the sale of this vaccine, which will nicely offset their losses and impending lawsuits over Vioxx. </p>
<p>From what I understand and have read, the data presented to the FDA included only the testing on women aged 16-26 (21,000, followed over a 5 year period). The studies on younger girls, aged 9-15, were only on 1,184 subjects, and they were followed for only 18 months. I really don’t know how to compare this to other long-term studies, but that seems short to me, especially considering the push to vaccinate elementary school aged girls.</p>
<p>At any rate, I think it’s reasonable to be concerned about jumping on a bandwagon so readily and so quickly. For many (including gyn practices), that concern is more about long-term effects/safety than about any religious beliefs, or any other belief about young people and sex.</p>
<p>I agree that safety has been insufficiently addressed, and hope that there are systems in place to receive and analyze both expect and unexpected long term effects.</p>
<p>Excellent idea. Our daughters will be receiving the vaccine as well.</p>
<p>Corranged, cytopathologist here, I diagnose HPV. Part of the reason that the vaccine is not recommended for boys (yet) is that the supply is not unlimited, and the capacity of the vaccine makers to make it is finite. Men get some disease from HPV, can even get cancers, but the rate is much, much less, so it makes sense to use the limited vaccine to protect the most vulnerable. Eventually, vaccination may be recommended for everyone.</p>
<p>My daughter is 19, and I’ am pressuring her to get vaccinated as soon as she gets back from France, in place long enough to get the shots.</p>
<p>I don’t exactly follow Zoosermom’s logic for allowing opting out and privacy, re: sexual activity, I’d recommend my sexually active D to get the shots anyway, for the reasons Sunny gave. Also, HPV is highly infectious, most women certainly are infected by intercourse, but it can be spread sometimes by sexual contact that is less than full intercourse, enough said. As a physician, I don’t get the same perspective of a patient’s sexual history hearing that she is HPV positive, than I would hearing that she had had syphilis, for instance.</p>
<p>Thanks for the info, Cangel.</p>
<p>Re: opting out of vaccines, I opted out of the Hep B for my kid, who thankfully missed the ‘vaccinate at birth’ requirement (begun in late 1991, and now done at 3 months I think). Nearly all vaccines have adjuvants that are metals-based, including mercury (in thimerosal), aluminum, etc. and unfortunately many parents of developmentally delayed kids suspect the vaccines played a role in their condition due to temporal ‘coincidences’. Gardasil contains 225 mcg of aluminum. Here is a link to some info: <a href=“http://www.nvic.org/Diseases/HPV/HPVRPT2.htm[/url]”>http://www.nvic.org/Diseases/HPV/HPVRPT2.htm</a> - Page down for side effects, etc.</p>
<p>You have to consider the risk/reward balance of any vaccine given the very real risk of side effects. You also have to consider the very great sums of money involved in vaccine sales if they are made mandatory.</p>
<p>You also have to consider the very real risk of Hepatitis B, which can be spread though many different ways, including close household contacts. And can lead to liver cancer. I hope that your child will do his or her own review of the vaccination literature at some point, espercially if he or she intends to ever have close contact with people, either at work or at college. S/he is relying on others to be vaccinated in his or her peer group due to state regs, but most adults do not have the vaccine, and s/he will be vulnerable. </p>
<p>Hep B is NOT a pretty sight. Can lead to chronic liver disease, cancer, needs for liver transplant, etc. At the very least, it requires some very strong medications to control it, which I’m sure have much greater potential for problems than the vaccine. I also think that there presently is no mercury in Hep B vaccine, so maybe now you would feel safer.</p>
<p>My d., college senior, and many of her friends just got the HPV vaccine this year. Even a couple of the girls who have had positive changes on Pap smears due to HPV were told by GYNs to go ahead and have the vaccine as they may have been exposed to one but not all four of the covered viruses.</p>
<p>From American Social Health Association:
</p>
<p>I thought I should revive this thread to caution everyone that if your daughter does go to get the HPV vaccine, she should mention the words “cervical cancer” frequently when requesting it.</p>
<p>“HPV” sounds a lot like “HBV,” which seems to be one of the ways of referring to the hepatitis B vaccine. When I took my daughter to get the HPV shot, we found it necessary to be extremely clear that we wanted HPV and not HBV, and even then some of the nurses at the county health department seemed confused. One of them agreed with me that there’s likely to be trouble because of the similar names of the vaccines.</p>
<p>So be careful. You don’t want your daughter to waste her time and your money getting the wrong shots.</p>
<p>Interesting. In my part of the country, Hepatitis B is referred exclusively as Hep B. Usually HPV is mistaken in conversation for HIV… And most of the seniors going off to college have already been vaccinated against Hep B. Once one has completed the series it would not be repeated, and if one had not, IT IS NOT A WASTE OF MONEY one should also get Hep B series. </p>
<p>No one just “gets” Hep B vaccine anyway. One’s status would be determined first-ie immune already from prior vaccine or nonimmune, and if unknown, a simple blood test would establish. This health dept is definately NOT the norm.</p>
<p>“I don’t exactly follow Zoosermom’s logic for allowing opting out and privacy, re: sexual activity,”</p>
<p>The privacy in the school system, in the school building. NYC is notorious for extremely personal information becoming public and my concern is that a young person’s sexual history (possible abuse or such) might be compromised. The bottom line is that the schools simply do not need to know if a young woman has received this vaccination and do not need to mandate it for attendance. Education about possible benefits – yes. Mandatory for admission --absolutely not.</p>
<p>Isn’t there some debate on whether the HPV virus is sexually transmitted or not? I thought I read that somewhere?</p>
<p>DKE, HPV can be transmitted through the vagina at birth in some instances (not common). It does not cause cervical disease in this instance, but actually causes a condition called laryngeal polyposis.
By far the most common mode of transmission is through heterosexual intercourse, but the virus is so highly contagious that it can be transmitted through sexual contact that is less than full intercourse. Also, it is a “one night stand” virus, when you have sexual contact with a person for HPV, it is as if you have had sex with everyone else that person has come into contact with.
That’s what made us (MDs) reluctant about disseminating the STD nature of this virus, none of the other STDs, including AIDs is so terribly infectious. You could have had a one night stand 10 years before you met your wife and transmit the virus to her. I’m not sure that everyone would consider that “unfaithfulness”, it gets really socially complicated. Also, for many, many years there was no direct test for HPV. The diagnosis was based on Pap smear, and because we cytopaths were trying to protect as many women as possible against cancer, not diagnose STDs, sometimes women were referred for follow-up or treatment to prevent cancer that maybe didn’t have HPV - better safe than sorry. Medically we are pretty certain now that most common cervical cancer is due to this virus, but most is not 100%, and it has taken nearly 40 years to reach that conclusion.</p>
<p>This brings me to Zoosermom’s point. I respectfully disagree. If we required this vaccine of everyone, and gave it age say age 9, then privacy would be a non-issue. That is why HepB is required at birth, it gets you out of the sticky questions of exposure. If everyone gets it, then privacy is almost a non-issue. the problem, of course, is availability of vaccine and how long is it effective, I’m not sure that we know if the immunity will last long enough to vaccinate very young children. I don’t support making it mandatory until it can be given to pre-pubertal children safely.</p>
<p>"This brings me to Zoosermom’s point. I respectfully disagree. If we required this vaccine of everyone, and gave it age say age 9, then privacy would be a non-issue. " </p>
<p>I respectfully submit to you that the specific paperwork in NYC requires very detailed explanations for refusing any and all vaccines and that paperwork is not confidential or private. Perhaps things are not that way in your locality and confidentiality is much more protected there. Mine is not a philosophical argument but, rather, a practical one based on past history and current practices.</p>
<p>on a lighter note, my 18-year old just got her first shot two days ago. My 20year old will start her series this week. The 20-year old heard from several of her sorority sisters that it’s one of the most painful vaccinations given. My 18-year old definitely agreed with this opinion. Any explanation as to why this might be so? Or anything the girls can do to lessen the pain prior to the injection other than the typical ibuprofen/icing of the area? My younger daughter says her bicep still smarts when someone hugs her (she graduated today, so there was lots and lots of hugging, etc.).</p>
<p>I can’t imagine this is the most painful vaccination; my daughter is the biggest baby and she didn’t flinch with any of her 3 HPV vaccines. She gets a flu shot each year and complains each and every time; she said nothing about her HPV. </p>
<p>Maybe if the girls are all getting their vaccine at school, the school is using a different size needle than most. Other than that, I can’t think of any reason why the HPV is more painful than others.</p>
<p>I have a question about that.</p>
<p>Umm,</p>
<p>Is it a good idea to get the vaccine even if your not ever going to be sexually active to get it…Like being a lesbian?</p>
<p>I asked my doctor about it and she thought I should talk to my mom first, my mom thought it was a good idea but I’ve made the personnel decision to not to do it. I’m not going to be sexually active with another male ever, pointless for me. But I would encourage other girls to do it.</p>
<p>Lesbians are sexually active, Bbecker. Just, you know, differently. Give yourself some credit. ;)</p>
<p>Anyway, according to a quick google search, you should still get it.
</p>