Chicken picking at feet

[laurmurf]

I've done lots and lots of research on this one, firstly because I had cervical cancer, and secondly because i have two daughters. I am very proud to say I am one of the people who has been bombarding the NHS, local PCT, local vaccination programme directors, school nurses, GP practice, etc to fight for the vaccination to be given in the first place and then to fight again for the programme to be extended to include girls currently in year 13 - originally outside of the vaccination programme. I feel if my letters have done anything towards this programme, and certainly in extending the programme, then I've won a massive victory for my family and others.

 

Girls have getting this vaccination in the States for several years. There are two different types: Gardisil and Cervarix. They both protect against the major cancer causing strains of HPV but there is also some protection from genital warts.

 

Yes, totally safe sex - always using a condom - would protect against HPV, but what about when your daughter wants to conceive a child in a loving monogomous relationship but her partner is a carrier of the virus? She could end up infected years after the programme.

 

Boys/men carry the virus but the only sign is occasionally they will get genital warts: believe me, as the mother of two boys as well - that's my next letter-writing campaign!

 

From a pragmatic point of view I could understand why the older girls were initially left out of the programme: once a girl has been exposed to the virus, the vaccination will do nothing for that strain. That means that once a girl is sexually active, the vaccination becomes less useful. Older girls are more likely to be in this category, younger girls are the most easy group to protect - FOR LIFE!

 

The NHS does not have bottomless reserves so it was a weighing up of the risks. Frankly I was prepared to pay the £500 or so for my elder daughter - but I am so delighted she will get it from the NHS programme, as will others. In the States, where people are paying for the vaccination (or their health insurance is) many older girls are getting vaccinated. There aren't many forms of cancer that can be prevented - cervical cancer is one of them.

 

There has been quite a lot about this vaccination in national newspapers - from the tabloids to the broadsheets - when it was going through the approval process with the NHS and NICE but you're right there hasn't been a huge amount of public information about it. PCTs were relying on more national info and the NHS has been relying on PCTs. School nurses have been visiting all the secondary schools in York and talking to the girls and giving them information several weeks before the programme begins in that school. In the schools I am connected to the takeup has been fantastic and there has been lots of parental support. The programme is being done through schools as the best way of catching the most children for the 3 injections, older girls will be done through GPs.

 

Sorry, I know I'm going on about this but this is something I feel absolutely passionate about. Yes, you should have had more notice and it would be worth contacting your PCT, school nurse and governing body to ask why such short period of time. But don't let that put you off considering the overwhelming benefits that this programme can offer.

[helenc]

My daughter is having her 1st one on Monday.

 

We had the forms for about a week when we needed to send them back in, which for some people could have been a short timesclae but this was in the press a lot around this time last year and I read up alot about it then. My daughter wanted to have the vaccine after reading the information leaflet.

 

I also noticed on the forms that the parents and the child had to consent but if the parents did not but the child did they would be assessed to see if they were capable of making an informed decision and could have the vaccine if deemed capable.

 

I must say my husband was unsure about it

[Beauty-Box]

My daughter had hers last year. I felt it would be beneficial for her to have it. My daughter wasn't bothered either way.

[Guest]

The school I work in is sending out letters this week or next to get the vaccinations done shortly - as stated already its to do with when the medical service pencils the schools in and they are rushing to roll out this valuable vaccine.

 

Personally I don't have a dd just a ds and I would get him this type of vaccine if offered. I'm all for vaccination and the benefits greatly outweigh the risks. I do however not agree with large doses and as such had seperate MMR jabs, I didn't really believe the Autism but but I don't like the idea of too much being pumped in at once.

[AmandaR]

Interesting thread. This is something I've been researching too as it will affect my daughter in a couple of years. I guess I am always suspicious when government try to push something on us but a couple of thought provoking pieces I found were:

 

Cervical cancer is invariably caused by the HPV (human papillomavirus) infection. Globally around 470,000 new cases are reported every year, and the disease annually kills around 230,000 women, many of whom are from developing countries.

 

And so when a drug company says it has discovered an effective vaccine against the virus, people should sit up and take notice.

 

That's exactly what happened when researchers from Dartmouth Medical School in New Hampshire tested a new vaccine, code-named HPV-16 and HPV-18, on 1,113 women against a placebo. It was effective against infection in nearly 92 per cent of cases, and was 100% effective against persistent infection.

 

As a result the paper was 'fast-tracked' by The Lancet, and its findings - "the vaccine could contribute substantially to reducing worldwide rates of cervical cancer" - were the only words on that week's cover.

 

So what's the problem? Well, it's probably nothing, but. . .the drug has been developed by GlaxoSmithKline, most of the researchers receive some funding or support from GlaxoSmithKline, the trial was paid for by GlaxoSmithKline, and technical analyses of the data was prepared by employees of GlaxoSmithKline.

 

We're not suggesting for a moment that there's been any wrong-doing or that there's been even the slightest partiality - it would have been nice if just someone not associated with GlaxoSmithKline had a look in, that's all.

(Source: The Lancet, 2004; 364: 1757-65) (wddty.com).

 

And

 

Such is the clamour for governments around the world to adopt mass immunisation programmes for adolescent girls against cervical cancer that a mass rally took place in Paris last week. It included leading doctors from all over Europe who shared a platform with celebrities.

 

They were calling for the universal take-up of the cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil, the only one on the market, which is manufactured by Sanofi Pasteur.

 

And guess what? The rally and support campaign were funded entirely by Sanofi Pasteur, who have so far put in more than £1 million ($1.9m) to get their new vaccine adopted by governments. They paid for the travel expenses of most of those who attended the rally in Paris, which was heralded as “the first global summit against cervical cancer”, and some also received an attendance fee.

 

Sanofi Pasteur’s tactics have been likened to a “battering ram”, although they are hardly different from any other drug company.

 

True, early trials suggested the vaccine provides protection against four common types of human papillomavirus, which can cause cervical and vulval pre-cancers and genital warts, but "Ooops, word censored!"ody is sure of the vaccine’s longterm health risks.

 

Health officials are also concerned that a mass vaccine programme would also deflect against adult screening, which they view as being equally as important.

 

But throw enough money at something, and any minor resistance gets trampled over, as can be witnessed in the USA where 20 states are planning to make the vaccine compulsory despite the concerns of parents. That’s science for you.

(Source: The Guardian, March 26, 2007) (wddty.com).

[chickencam]

My DD is in yr 10 so therefore too old at the moment, she is very keen to have the vaccination when it becomes available to her age group.

 

It is important to have enough time to do your own research into the pros and cons of a new vaccine, and 2 days is not enough. However if I myself were in this position I would go for vaccination. Teens are very vunerable and despite their best intentions may find themselves becoming sexually active with little thought on the spur of the moment and any protection they can have is a good thing. Adults can get carried away after a few drinks even when they have a few more years of common sense and life experience, therefore teens need to be given as many tools to protect themselves as possible.

[Tiggy]

there has been lots of debate about this, & I feel that the DOH has been a cheepskate because there is another more effective vaccine that covers more of the common HPV viruses that also cause herpes & genital warts, & they chose the cheaper one OH & I are more informed because we work in health care and hi DD will be vaccinated but I understand how worrying it can be when yet another vaccination is offered for your child when you don't know too much about it, there is lots of info around in your GP surgery, some people are concerned that because the virus that normally causes cervical cancer is sexually transmitted then giving the vaccine will encourage youngsters to be more promiscuous. I'm not sure that is true.

[The Dogmother]

I think that peer pressure and lack of proper pastoral care and advice at home are more likely to make teens promiscuous.. they need educating.

[Cinnamon]

I have had a chat to Cleo about it. She is 13 & terrified by needles

I explained that there will be 3 injections,& what she will be protected against & she just said that of course she will be having them,if it offers her protection against cervical cancer.

 

This may not seem a big thing,but she is truly terrified of having injections, so I am really proud of her

[laurmurf]

Well done to Cleo, and to you Cinnamon!

[baby bears mum]

This is a brilliant thread. Thank you.

 

Baby Bear is in year 7 at the moment but I am trying to do as much research as I can. I am really not sure about this vaccination. I am just not sure that there has been enough information regarding the long term effects and effectiveness of the vaccine.

 

I totally understand wanting to protect against cervical cancer and am a regular with my smear tests but am really concerned about the lack of long term facts. I'm worried that this is a 'rush through' - although can understand why.

 

Will keep researching.

 

Not much help am I.

[clootie]

I think that peer pressure and lack of proper pastoral care and advice at home are more likely to make teens promiscuous.. they need educating.

 

[clootie]

This is a brilliant thread. Thank you.

 

Baby Bear is in year 7 at the moment but I am trying to do as much research as I can. I am really not sure about this vaccination. I am just not sure that there has been enough information regarding the long term effects and effectiveness of the vaccine.

 

I totally understand wanting to protect against cervical cancer and am a regular with my smear tests but am really concerned about the lack of long term facts. I'm worried that this is a 'rush through' - although can understand why.

 

Will keep researching.

 

Not much help am I.

 

Yes, you are actually !! I feel exactly the same !! I'm still glad I didn't rush into anything. There is still time if I decide it's the thing to do.

[The Dogmother]

Rosie was asking me about it this evening. She doesn't really know exactly what it means, but didn't ask me for an explanation either, just wondered whether she'd need to have the vaccination. I think that some of her friends at school have sisters who are older and have had it.

 

I will explain nearer the time... I'm trickling the whole sex ed thing through to her but she's still only 10.5 and I want to preserve some innocence while I can. She's a sensible lass, but no doubt that will all change when the old hormones get going

[herbalgirl]

HI everyone

I've read these posts here with a great deal of interest as we have chosen not to vaccinate at all. I have done a lot of research, spent many hours agonising about my decision and spoken to scores of 'experts' about the subject.

 

One point that everyone has missed here is that illness is multifactorial and doesn't just strike a person randomly. There is usually one or more of the following:

 

Genetic predisposition - sometimes seen in family history of autoimmune disease

Immune system dysfunction or irregularity

Stress - environmental, emotional, physical

Poor diet - sugar, additives, junk food, loads of dairy

Obesity/Underweight

 

The main reason we didn't vaccinate is that the chance of having side effects for most vaccines (except for tetanus) is greater than the risk of severe damage from an illness, when a child is nursed appropriately and given a chance to fully convalesce (i.e 3 weeks off school!) Also that childhood illnesses confer life-long immunity after resolution. Vaccination can damage the immune system permenantly as it interferes with T-cellfunction and production, can set up autoimmune tendencies as the body becomes hypersensitive after being injected with toxic substances into the blood stream and can also lead to a state of chronic inflammation. Cancer is an autoimmune disease (as is MS, CFS, Diabetes, Eczema, psoriasis). Inflammation is a major factor in the route to cancer, agitated cells begin to function abnormally.

 

Anyway, I suppose i'd just like to add, it's not as straight forward as vaccinate, don't get a disease. Vaccinated children still get 'viruses' which at times are astonishingly similar to childhood illnesses they are 'protected' against yet GP's refuse to acknowledge this. Vaccination is an emmotive subject, especially as GPs get paid per vaccinated child and truly unbiased information is not readily available. So please be careful. Vaccination did not have as big an impact on disease as it is credited for - clean water, sanitation and good diets as well as the natural disease cycle should be credited also. Vaccinations are also withdrawn and 'modified' due to adverse effects very regularly without announcement to the general public.

 

The Mother magazine has some fantastic articles about vaccination - especially the HPV one, it is a UK magazine and can be found online.There are some great books too:

Aviva-Romm 'vaccination' and 'Wendy Lydall 'Raising a vaccine free child'.

 

I am a trained herbalist (Bsc) so have a very different approach to health and disease from most GPs, but I am not anti conventional medicine. I want to get my child (and the one on the way) vaccinated for tetanus but can no longer get the single vaccine.

 

Sorry for the long post, it's just nice to have the opportunity to support those concerned about vaccination. I don't envy you at all! Sometimes I just wish I had no idea about this, especially when there is such a lot of pressure from people who often don't know the full story.

Becky

[Lesley]

That's a very interesting response Becky and it's nice to see such a healthy debate about it.

 

I tend to lean towards those views myself although my children are both adults now. I do have a grandaughter of almost 11 so I'm interested in all views.

 

I think rushing parents to sign consent forms without giving them time to research something as important as this is totally unhelpful.

[MedusA]

My DD is 23 so doesn't have the option at present. However she has had all previous vaccines offered. I'm not sure how effective it is anyway as she has had both the Measles jab at 14 months old and then the MMR at a later age. Yet her recent blood test for the NHS job she's about to start, has shown she is still not immune against Measles and needs another jab.

 

That said, I would go for it if it's offered. Some chance of protection is better than no chance.

 

Tough decision for you nevertheless. *hugs*

[ChrisP]

Ok, so I had my 1st dose this week

The next one is in 6 weeks

But is it true the 3rd is 6 months after the 2nd??

[Cate in NZ]

Ok, so I had my 1st dose this week

The next one is in 6 weeks

But is it true the 3rd is 6 months after the 2nd??

 

Errm, I'm not entirely sure with Cerverix (which is the vaccine that the UK are giving) but with Gardisil it's 6 months after the first, although it hasn't got to be exactly spot on, and I think they're basically on the same schedule.

 

I have mixed feelings about this, certainly I think that if you're going to give a vaccine to protect against the Human Papilloma (or "wart") Virus then it's best to give the most effective vaccine available, and it seems as if that's Gardisil which gives effective protection against 4 strains and lesser protection against 6 others, rather then Cerverix which protects against 2, albeit the 2 which are most commonly implicated in cervical cancer.

 

However, I can't help feeling that this is a huge expense when there are other areas of health care that could arguably be said to be equally, or more , deserving...what about some effective screening for prostate cancer for example .

 

Do they imagine that long term they can save money by scaling down the cervical smear screening programme perhaps :think

[herbalgirl]

Hi again everyone

I was talking to a friend of mine who is studying herbal medicine with a lady who's daughter is of vaccine age. She declined for her daughter but three of the girls vaccinated had adverse reactions. One was hospitalised with neurological symptoms for a week.

I'm not sure where the adverse reactions are being recorded or even reported, many doctors do not report adverse vaccine reactions.

Becky

[clootie]

Hi again everyone

I was talking to a friend of mine who is studying herbal medicine with a lady who's daughter is of vaccine age. She declined for her daughter but three of the girls vaccinated had adverse reactions. One was hospitalised with neurological symptoms for a week.

I'm not sure where the adverse reactions are being recorded or even reported, many doctors do not report adverse vaccine reactions.

Becky

 

Thanks for that Becky - hope it all works out for the girls. It must be a dreadful worry for their parents. I'm glad I declined - not doubts in my mind at all now although I did waver ever so slightly at one point !!

[cordelia]

I have three daughters...am I alone in thinking that BOYS should be vaccinated too???, as girls arent going to develop this type of cancer spontaneously.

 

 

Why does the female race have to take care of everything ?, and get blamed when things dont go right..

 

one other poster had to explain her friend wasn't promiscuous.....we should never have to say that about ourselves...most adults have sex after all...and it could be your beloved husband or partner, who has inadvertenlty passed on the virus...

 

I too worry about the side effects..

[clootie]

I have three daughters...am I alone in thinking that BOYS should be vaccinated too???, as girls arent going to develop this type of cancer spontaneously.

 

 

Why does the female race have to take care of everything ?, and get blamed when things dont go right..

 

one other poster had to explain her friend wasn't promiscuous.....we should never have to say that about ourselves...most adults have sex after all...and it could be your beloved husband or partner, who has inadvertenlty passed on the virus...

 

I too worry about the side effects..

 

There have been some murmurings about boys being jabbed in the future.

[cordelia]

only fair I think

[clootie]

Well, I'm keeping my daughter under lock and key until she's 35 anyway !!