So let me get this straight... - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-20-2010, 07:59 PM   #46
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 05:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AttnKleinkind View Post
From what I've read though, cervical cancer (potentially caused by HPV) is actually the most treatable cancer there is, as long as one gets their yearly PAP.
Obviously this is all relative and obviously it is best not to get any type of cancer, but I don't even believe that cervical cancer is in the top 5 of cancer types by survival rates, and that is even with taking into account the reductions achieved by PAP smears.

Quote:
Also, HPV is pretty much the common cold of sex. If you have had sex with someone who has had sex with someone else then you can consider yourself exposed. So Gardasil actually seems like a kind of an unnecessary vaccine and considering the nature of HPV it would be unwise to unnecessarily inflict it if there's any question of it being unsafe, since it's just not necessary.
Not to be rude, but this is a really silly statement. Unless you take the position that we women will all have a single sex partner in our life who will be a virgin at the time that we meet and will never cheat OR unless you assume that every single sexual partner that we have for the rest of our life (including our husband) will use a condom each and every time (how will you have children?), you will be exposed. If I am in a monogamous long-term relationship with a man who has slept with 20 women before me, my only option to avoid exposure of the multiple strains that he may have picked up is for him to wear a condom forever. Clearly this is neither a reasonable nor a realistic expectation.
__________________

__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 12:31 PM   #47
The Fly
 
AttnKleinkind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 181
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Not to be rude, but this is a really silly statement. Unless you take the position that we women will all have a single sex partner in our life who will be a virgin at the time that we meet and will never cheat OR unless you assume that every single sexual partner that we have for the rest of our life (including our husband) will use a condom each and every time (how will you have children?), you will be exposed. If I am in a monogamous long-term relationship with a man who has slept with 20 women before me, my only option to avoid exposure of the multiple strains that he may have picked up is for him to wear a condom forever. Clearly this is neither a reasonable nor a realistic expectation.
What I meant by viewing it as a common cold was to make the point that it is extremely common, and thus one doesn't need to take such ridiculous precautions, neither should it have any stigma. According to the
Guttmacher Institute
"nearly three in four Americans between the ages of 15 and 49 have been infected with genital HPV at some point in their life." Just as you wouldn't wear a mask obsessively or sanitize your hands constantly to prevent getting a cold, you wouldn't take the precautions you mentioned to prevent getting HPV. Especially considering that "Studies have shown that 70% of new HPV infections clear within one year, as many as 91% clear within two years." according to the CDC 2004 Report to Congress on Prevention of HPV. HPV only leads to cancer in rare cases, and even then, cervical cancer is very preventable. Mortality rates are falling by 2% each year in the US, and most cases where cervical cancer develops are in women who have not had a pap smear in the preceeding 3-5 years. (this info found Here.

So all that to say, I was just trying to put the campaign for the vaccine ("it's risking girls' lives to prevent it!") in perspective, since HPV is so common, and the worse effects from it are so preventable.
__________________

__________________
AttnKleinkind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2010, 10:50 AM   #48
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AttnKleinkind View Post
I was just trying to put the campaign for the vaccine ("it's risking girls' lives to prevent it!") in perspective, since HPV is so common, and the worse effects from it are so preventable.
Tough to do when pharmaceutical companies are using deceptive marketing techniques to put the drugs on the market though. And when the government decides such companies are "too big to nail."

In addition to Merck, there's Pfizer.

Feds found Pfizer too big to nail - CNN.com
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2010, 11:19 AM   #49
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,688
Local Time: 04:39 PM
What do you think the deceptive marketing techniques are for this vaccine in particular?
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2010, 12:52 PM   #50
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 05:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AttnKleinkind View Post
Where I live, it's been marketed as something that every young girl should get

[...]

Also, HPV is pretty much the common cold of sex.
Exactly, so why would anyone not get it? I would've gotten it if I'd qualified and I'm married (top of the age range and my insurance would not cover...a rant for another thread). You'd rather get cancer and treat that than get the vaccine?
__________________
Liesje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2010, 06:30 PM   #51
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
What do you think the deceptive marketing techniques are for this vaccine in particular?
Merely following up on AttnKlein's point, and pointing out that the precedent exists for the two major pharmaceutical companies, and not insignificantly so.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2010, 06:51 PM   #52
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,688
Local Time: 04:39 PM
So nothing in particular for THIS vaccine?

It just seems like manufactured rage, one that is masking another agenda.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2010, 07:25 PM   #53
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
So nothing in particular for THIS vaccine?

It just seems like manufactured rage, one that is masking another agenda.
I'll refer to an earlier post: "as the father of two little girls, if I'm going to consent to give them a vaccination that is said to protect them from cervical cancer, I'm going to make sure they don't die as a result of it."

As AttnKlein said: "Where I live, it's been marketed as something that every young girl should get, and if she's not, she's being irresponsible with her body."

If you're a company who's going to make such a marketing push, on behalf of THIS vaccine, which may be dubious, and you have a history of using deceptive marketing techniques, I'm going to be skeptical.

My agenda is keeping my little girls safe.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2010, 10:36 PM   #54
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,688
Local Time: 04:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
I'll refer to an earlier post: "as the father of two little girls, if I'm going to consent to give them a vaccination that is said to protect them from cervical cancer, I'm going to make sure they don't die as a result of it."

As AttnKlein said: "Where I live, it's been marketed as something that every young girl should get, and if she's not, she's being irresponsible with her body."

If you're a company who's going to make such a marketing push, on behalf of THIS vaccine, which may be dubious, and you have a history of using deceptive marketing techniques, I'm going to be skeptical.

My agenda is keeping my little girls safe.
But as you can see, the numbers have been fabricated...

And I haven't seen any advertising that says "she's being irresponsible with her body", have you?
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2010, 04:42 PM   #55
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
But as you can see, the numbers have been fabricated...
Not by CNN and CBS.

YouTube - Gardasil WARNING! - CNN Report 8.11.8

YouTube - Is HPV Vaccine Safe?
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2010, 04:58 PM   #56
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 02:39 PM
Nathan,

I watched all of the first video from August 2008.

Not much there, the young girl got an auto-immune disease 2 months after the vaccine?
Her doctor said there may be a possibility of it being related to the vaccine.

It also said there was a comprehensive study that would be concluded by October 2008.
What happened with that study?

When there is a real problem, and there have been with big phrama putting profits first, there is a more consistent pattern with recipients having the same bad reaction within a reasonable time frame. Where is that pattern?
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2010, 05:09 PM   #57
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 05:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post

My agenda is keeping my little girls safe.
Sure, it's just that I believe you're not actually doing that (statistically speaking) in this instance.
__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2010, 06:11 PM   #58
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
It also said there was a comprehensive study that would be concluded by October 2008.
What happened with that study?
A comprehensive study conducted by Merck, the company that produces and markets the drug.

I'm not exactly holding my breath...
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2010, 12:49 PM   #59
The Fly
 
AttnKleinkind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 181
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liesje View Post
Exactly, so why would anyone not get it? I would've gotten it if I'd qualified and I'm married (top of the age range and my insurance would not cover...a rant for another thread). You'd rather get cancer and treat that than get the vaccine?
What I meant by likening HPV to the common cold was not only in the amount of people who are exposed to it, but also the ease of treatment in the large majority of cases. In the links I posted above, it says that most cases are cleared up by the body itself, and the cases that are more serious can usually be prevented from getting into something more serious. Kind of like a cold how sometimes it can lead to pneumonia or something more serious in certain cases, but I'm not going to go hugely out of my way to prevent getting a cold for this reason. In the case of HPV, the potential for cancer does not seem great enough to warrant me to go to have a new vaccine which no one knows the long-term effects of yet. If the risk for cancer was much greater, I'd definitely weigh the risks and possibly consider the vaccine, but right now, due to the nature of HPV and the low potential for cervical cancer, to me it's more of a risk to actually take the vaccine.

(sorry for the delayed response, I was working on a final paper for school!)
__________________
AttnKleinkind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2010, 01:04 PM   #60
The Fly
 
AttnKleinkind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 181
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
And I haven't seen any advertising that says "she's being irresponsible with her body", have you?
I wouldn't call the marketing deceptive, although they do make out getting the vaccine to be sort of a no-brainer, and that anyone who cares about their body will take it. I've heard one on the radio that went like this:

[somehow topic of Gardasil is brought up]
Girl 1: "I don't think I'll get that, I'm SO afraid of needles"
Girl 2: "Yeah? Well I'm SO afraid of cancer."

Obviously they're marketing so they're trying to sell it, and they of course have the right to do that. They're not going to go into all the nuances of HPV and cervical cancer, but this does leave one with the impression that someone would be pretty irresponsible to not get it, and the only reason that someone would be for trivial reasons like being scared of needles.

I'm not trying say that the people marketing the drug have some sort of agenda, I just wanted to draw attention to the fact that it's a more complicated issue, and cervical cancer may not be such a pressing issue as it's made out to be.
__________________

__________________
AttnKleinkind is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com