Omlet Smart Autodoor - New in box

[UKMARCH]

Hi, my ED is due this soon and am in two minds. I know its been going for a few years now but it seems to me that it will some time before the long term results can be seen. I know it needs to be done before girls become sexually active but 12 seems young to me and something I don't want to have to worry about just yet! As the duration of the vaccine is currently unknown but thought to be up to 6.4 years after use the chances are it could have worn off by the time its needed and the information states that the need for booster doses has not been investigated.

[chickencam]

I understand your concerns, we held off with my ED at the beginning of the vaccination programme, but after a little time and some more research we decided that she should have it. She very much wanted it and was in the second wave of vaccinations, they did yr 8's first then they moved onto the older girls for whom it hadn't been available when they were yr 8, she was 16 when she had it through our doctors surgery instead of the school. 2 years on it is YD's turn and we have agreed to her having it at school because I feel that I would rather she has whatever protection it can offer.

[The Dogmother]

Rosie has had hers.

 

There was a thread a while back about this, if you do a search it ought to pop up.

[Snowy]

The efficacy of vaccines is far better if given at a younger age - it is when the body is most able to produce the antibodies to fight the disease. The older you are when you have a vaccine, the more the chances of it not working. Might be worth taking this into consideration when making your decision.

[UKMARCH]

Thanks, my children have had all the other offered immunisations but for some unexplained reason I have an uneasy feeling about this one, I did see the previous threads on this a couple of years ago when this scheme was in its infancy but just wondered whether anyone has changed opinions since. I guess its early days in the grand scheme of things so only time will tell how effective it will be if it can take 10-20 years for cervical cancers to become apparent.

[squiffs]

know it needs to be done before girls become sexually active but 12 seems young to me and something I don't want to have to worry about just yet!

 

 

Sadly, whether you want to have to worry about it or not, children will make that decision for themselves, it's still an issue. If children as young as 13 are becoming sexually active, then it's pointless vaccinating everyone at 14, and so forth. I wish this had been available when I was still in school. I was maybe 18 when the vaccine programme was rolled out. I would pay for it privately if I had the money.

[Tiggy]

its a very touchy subject for many because of how the disease is transmitted but you look at your own 12 year olds and can't imagine that they would ever need to be vaccinated but its not long before that litle girl is 14 going on 27 and with the best will in the world you cannot know how she may behave in her teens. I would have been happier for the other vaccine to have been used that covers for genital warts too, but thats another story

[Chickvic]

My daughter had hers last year, she's now in Year 9 and thankfully boys are still an alien species but I think any protection for the future is worth it. I wouldn't have hesitated to have it myself but at 37 don't think I'll be offered the vaccination

[Woodcat]

I wish i had had it. It may be the case that we won't know the full benefits and amounts for another 10 or 20 years but even if it only reduces the chance by 5% or less that is still worth having. Anything that reduces the risk is worth it

[sadietoo]

I wish i had had it. It may be the case that we won't know the full benefits and amounts for another 10 or 20 years but even if it only reduces the chance by 5% or less that is still worth having. Anything that reduces the risk is worth it

 

Surely it depends on the risk attendant on the vaccine, which at the moment cannot be quantified as it hasn't been around for long enough?

[Snowy]

Surely it depends on the risk attendant on the vaccine, which at the moment cannot be quantified as it hasn't been around for long enough?

 

As the practice of making vaccines has been around for many years now, any new vaccine is based on long standing and well tried and tested methods of production. Therefore new vaccines are being developed far more quickly and far less testing is now required. They are deemed to be extremely safe nowadays (to the extent that the range of people they can be given to has increased, for example to pregnant women).

[sadietoo]

Surely it depends on the risk attendant on the vaccine, which at the moment cannot be quantified as it hasn't been around for long enough?

 

As the practice of making vaccines has been around for many years now, any new vaccine is based on long standing and well tried and tested methods of production. Therefore new vaccines are being developed far more quickly and far less testing is now required. They are deemed to be extremely safe nowadays (to the extent that the range of people they can be given to has increased, for example to pregnant women).

 

Ok.....but before I have any foreign body injected into my body (or those of my children), I like more information about its effect (or indeed efficacy) ..and in this case that can't be determined yet....As a side point, do you not feel that there is likely to be more risk taking in a generation who believe (rightly or wrongly) that they are protected by vaccines??? (which in itself will make a valid long term assessment of the benefits of this programme all the more difficult?)

[Snowy]

Surely it depends on the risk attendant on the vaccine, which at the moment cannot be quantified as it hasn't been around for long enough?

 

As the practice of making vaccines has been around for many years now, any new vaccine is based on long standing and well tried and tested methods of production. Therefore new vaccines are being developed far more quickly and far less testing is now required. They are deemed to be extremely safe nowadays (to the extent that the range of people they can be given to has increased, for example to pregnant women).

 

Ok.....but before I have any foreign body injected into my body (or those of my children), I like more information about its effect (or indeed efficacy) ..and in this case that can't be determined yet....As a side point, do you not feel that there is likely to be more risk taking in a generation who believe (rightly or wrongly) that they are protected by vaccines??? (which in itself will make a valid long term assessment of the benefits of this programme all the more difficult?)

 

I'm not getting into the rights or wrongs of it, just explaining the governments rationale for not having prolonged testing periods for new vaccines. I administer hundreds of vaccines a year and at a recent clinical update we were told that there are more new vaccines being developed all the time. They will become available very soon (depending on funding obviously). At the end of the day, we can only give out as much information as possible in order to let the individual/patient make an informed decision. No one will ever force it on you or your daughter.

[TheGirlsMum]

I have yet to break it to ED that she has to have 3 "needles" They will need to issue ear plugs to the whole surgery

[clootie]

I instigated the first thread on this subject a couple of years ago and my daughter didn't have it. No regrets.

[sari]

I did think long and hard about allowing my daughter to have HPV. I was unable to get an answer to the questions I had, without feeling patronised or a nuisance. In Australia IIRC the vaccine also helps prevent genital warts, and having had a close friend with these as a teen, I was trying to find out whether this vaccine could be given instead. Again, little info available without feeling belittled. I decided to have Nin vaccinated, because of seeing people I love go through unpleasant treatment due to cell changes. I only wish they vaccinate the boys too.

[squiffs]

I did think long and hard about allowing my daughter to have HPV. I was unable to get an answer to the questions I had, without feeling patronised or a nuisance. In Australia IIRC the vaccine also helps prevent genital warts, and having had a close friend with these as a teen, I was trying to find out whether this vaccine could be given instead. Again, little info available without feeling belittled. I decided to have Nin vaccinated, because of seeing people I love go through unpleasant treatment due to cell changes. I only wish they vaccinate the boys too.

 

 

Boys can't get womb related cancers from HPV, and that's the main focus of the vaccine, it's too costly to just immunise against STIs for the fact that they're unpleasant.

[The Dogmother]

I think that Sari's point here is that it would help to prevent the spread of HPV.

[laurmurf]

Boys would also be prevented from getting mouth cancers if they got the HPV vaccine as well as being carriers.

 

I fought to have my girls vaccinated and was delighted when they got their shots. I've lost the battle for my boys and just can't afford it privately for both of them. I have had to take the calculated risk of them being less susceptible to getting mouth cancers as well as sending them out into the world as potential carriers.

[Valkyrie]

I'm with Cloots on this - there was a lot of talk about the vaccine but my daughter was older when they finally started the vaccine. I would have refused to allow her to be subjected to it. I asked her about it and she didn't want it either.

 

I have no worries about her behaviour as she takes her religion very seriously.

[squiffs]

It's not just about a child's moral compass though - anyone who has ever had unprotected sex has a high chance of being infected with hpv, even if they wait until they're married. They just issue it at a young age so it's got a higher likelihood of being effective. Vaccinating people already exposed to it would be a waste of money. Someone's behaviour doesn't necessarily stop them from contracting it unless they take a vow of celibacy.

[squiffs]

Laurmurf I get your point totally, but by vaccinating all girls, it dramatically reduces the boys' risk too. Much like vaccinating children against TB with the bcg. On an NHS budget I think offering even half the young population such a new vaccine is pretty good going, NICE wouldn't have funded it if they deemed it to be a waste of money.

[Alis girls]

I dont have daughters but as someone who had abnormal cells in their early 20's and the only gynae nursing I had done had me nursing women in advanced stages of cervical cancer I was convinced I was going to die. I had no one to turn to and was hardly promiscious in todays terms - I came from a strict religious background so was very much on my own. You ladies on this forum are a helluva lot more understanding than my mum would have been. I had treatment and so far all these yrs later have been ok. But theres a small risk it could return prob no more now than any other woman in her nearly 50's. It is up to you but if I had girls I'd advise them to have the vaccine.

[surfer_chicken]

I was 15 when I had my vaccines. I knew a lot about it as it was in the news a lot at the time, and I didn't want it. I felt pressured into it by my parents and the school and even missed a couple of days off school "ill" to try and avoid the jabs. I can see the pros of the HPV vaccine, but I don't think it they outweigh the cons and as a needle phobic I'd rather not have gone through the stress of it all.

[NannyOgg]

know it needs to be done before girls become sexually active but 12 seems young to me and something I don't want to have to worry about just yet!

 

 

Sadly, whether you want to have to worry about it or not, children will make that decision for themselves, it's still an issue. If children as young as 13 are becoming sexually active, then it's pointless vaccinating everyone at 14, and so forth. I wish this had been available when I was still in school. I was maybe 18 when the vaccine programme was rolled out. I would pay for it privately if I had the money.

 

As a teenage pregnancy midwife I have to agree. I'm sure that the parents of our youngest clients never in a million years thought their daughters were sexually active. Unless you can be 100% sure (and who truly can be) that your child will tell you before they plan to have sex, then at least this way, you can be sure they have that protection in place already.