5 February 2007 at 6:21:33 PM
Peter Stern of Dripping Springs wrote me in regard to my last HPV post in which, in the heat of the moment after reading yet another male viewpoint saying that mandatory vaccines for females in just fine, I called a Butt Out timeout. He wrote:
Usually I agree with you on the issues you present and certainly you're entitled to your opinion ------
Regarding Perry's invasion of our right to privacy and other constitutional rights with regard to the HPV issue you state that:
While I comprehend what you really are stating, it gets lost in the emotion of the moment and may not be clear to your readers.
As a good father with 2 daughters I believe my interest and "say" merits consideration. I already sent you my article on this Perry mandate nonsense and you know I stand against it.
I really don't think it should be reduced to a man vs. woman issue. I believe it's an issue of intelligence, clinical reality, political motivation and profit-killings. Clearly, this is another special interest Perry empirical mandate on ALL our rights --- not just against women --- but in this instance they ARE the ones with most to lose!
I know Peter read my other posts on this matter and knows I also consider the main issues to be
Perry acting as King over the Legislature and creating mandated LAW without any type of consent from the governed.
As long as there are deep pockets with Big Pharm that contribute heavily to governmental officials, the question of whether mandates are done from true altruism will be around, forefront and center. (Plus, although I have not yet confirmed it, I read that Perry's stock portfolio or trust fund includes a hefty portion of Merck stock-so who profits?)
A close reading of the Gardasil documentation shows that some of the premises being pitched by Merck are flawed and anyone that blindly agrees with the marketing pitch without some reasoned thought and questions is being, kindly, short-sighted.
And I will bend my butt-out missive IF someone has daughters, as Peter does. I think I have been pretty clear that I see this not primarily as a male-female issue, but as per the points above. That said, *because* it only involves females, any discussion of vaccinations, especially that involve mandatory actions, should be done by those with some *skin* in the game. I'm not going to launch into a longer entry about women and Big Pharm, except to say, again, that women are far more often used as the ones that bear the responsibility for sexual actions, and a unique perspective-*because* it happens to them. I know I'm not the only person who wonders out loud why Merck chose to target 12 year old girls and not boys-could it have been that parents would have dug in their heels faster had all children been involved but it's more *normal* to put out medications for girls? (I noticed that Gardasil hasn't been tested very long, and didn't even test for genetic mutations, etc.). The rate of cervical cancer is low in this country and that's due to regular pap smear testing and related additional testing. Cervical cancer can have other causes than HPV, and Gardasil's literature says as much. Seems to me that education to let young girls know about pap testing and perhaps some kind of help for those who can't pay would be better than lining the pockets of Big Pharm. (And I am not saying parents who want to vaccinate their daughters shouldn't do it, of course they can, but that ought to be, as Perry even said BEFORE he was elected, a family decision). But you can't talk ONLY about the prime issues of Perry and Merck's contempt for the public without realizing that male-female issues do play a part in it, even if not the main issue. Saying that I do not believe that bringing up that part of the issue reduces it to a male-female issue, but rather adds another layer of discussion complexity, where it is NOT simply The Religious Right Against True Health.
Here's what Peter himself said about the issue. I would only argue that I believe Abstinence only training does a disservice to youth; abstinence, of course, ought to be taught but as part of a number of realistic ways of avoiding pregnancy.
Governor's Mandates: Trans-Texas Toll Corridor and Now HPV Vaccinations
The Governor's New Clothes
Gov. Perry stands before his post-reelection mirror, pats his hair in place, thinks of special interest mandates and admires his newly designed, hand-made invisible clothing.
Good grief! They could make a fairy tale out of this!
Only a handful of voters believes that the governor is "playing with a full deck", while the remaining 61-percent of reality-based voters know better and didn't vote to reelect Perry.
Okay, "King" Perry mandates that all 6th grade girls must be vaccinated due to the HPV vaccine for sixth-grade girls, "because sexually transmitted virus can cause cervical cancer."
So now the Emperor of Texas is trying to tell everyone how to raise their kids? Instead of "his supreme lowness" mandating the vaccine, shouldn't it be offered as a viable option?
I have 2 daughters and 1 son. I'm telling the governor to take his mandate and shove it "where the sun don't shine"! No way would I have my girls get these shots if they don't need them, and I certainly don't need the governor or the state to tell me how to raise my kids. BTW, isn't it illegal for Perry to mandate this? There is no epidemic as far as I'm aware.
BTW, doesn't this mandate help the health care / pharmaceutical industries, e.g., Merck, et. al.? a.k.a., Perry campaign contributors?
This is directly from medical handbooks on the topic:
Vaccinated girls still need cervical cancer screening. Three reasons: First, the vaccine will NOT protect against all types of HPV that cause cervical cancer, so vaccinated girls will still be at risk for some. Second, some girls may not get all required doses of vaccine or not get them at the right times, so they may not get the vaccine’s full benefits. Third, girls may not get the full benefit of the vaccine if they receive it after they’ve already acquired one of the four HPV types.
Consequently, GETTING THE VACCINE DOES NOT ENSURE THAT GIRLS WON'T GET HPV OR OTHER SEXUALLY-TRANSMITTED INFECTIONS.
The governor and legislature have shown Texans that they can't even resolve urgent 10-year old issues, so now some of them are going to tell all parents how to raise their children? Like toll roads, property taxes, and other issues, no INDEPENDENT study has been taken that proves these vaccinations are needed!
Like any legitimate community health concern, the primary precaution is education. Parents and community members should be reviewing educational options to teach young girls what can happen if/when they are sexually active. Let's face it, in our contemporary society we should be preaching abstinence due to all the sexually-transmitted diseases and infections individuals are in danger of contacting. Not just girls, but all members of our society are at-risk and require the education as a public service.
Yet just like all those other political issues, this is another greedy special interest ploy using fear tactics to make profit-killings --- only this time it's at the expense of our daughters re: the pretense of maintaining their health.
Governor, where does it end?
Fortunately, some intelligent officials are communicating to the governor that this is NOT a good mandate.
Beware, Texans, this merely is the first chapter of "Mr. Goodhair Goes to Washington".
Latest Blog Post by salon -Video- Somervell County Commissioners Court Special Sessions (2) Dec 23 2019
You! Leave a Comment! You Know you Want To!
You must be a registered member to comment on the blog.
Your first post is held pending approval to make sure you're not
a spammer bot
Or you can login!
New poster comments are moderated,
meaning they won't show up until approved... or not. Be patient-we
have lives outside this blog, so it might take awhile You want to be rude?
totally stupid? inappropriate? Racist? Bigoted? Flame war baiter? Your
post may be deleted. Spammers or people posting pretend interest comments
but really wanting to hawk their latest book or sell stuff or govt
propaganda flacks won't see their posts published. Comments do not
necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the site owner(salon).
If you have a problem with logging in or registering, please speak up
right away. Love your comments. Oh, except spammers
More on commenting
for Main Page
Sunday, January 19, 2020
Paul Harper offered to settle State of Texas ex rel. Best v Harper lawsuit for $68k back in 2016
Video- Somervell County Commissioners Court Special Sessions (2) Dec 23 2019
Top 100 Posts on Somervell County Salon for 2019
Plans for Somervell County Salon Blog for 2020
Imagine you were called up for jury duty and some people said they'd already made up their mind
National Review on Removing Trump from Office (12/2019)
Been awhile. Send me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org with the names of who you're talking about, above. Also, the newspaper editor is no longer local, ie officed here, but the paper is run....
(What Happened to Jerry Jacene? )
I'd love to see the Hotel Guest books and see if Jacene's name shows up long before he officially *found* the tracks. I'd like to know if the Visitor's Bureau has emails wit....
(What Happened to Jerry Jacene? )
I see the land or that part of it is now in the hands of Glen Rose's own Corky Underwood.
Is Jacene still involved? I had already informed the Visitor Bureau manager (who's....
(What Happened to Jerry Jacene? )