Merck To Halt Lobbying For Vaccine 544
theodp writes "Reacting to a furor from some parents, advocacy groups, and public health experts, Merck said yesterday that it would stop lobbying state legislatures to require the use of its new cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil, which acts against strains of the sexually-transmitted human papilloma virus. The $400, 3-shot regimen was approved by the FDA in June. Later that month, a federal advisory panel recommended that females 11-26 years old be vaccinated. The governor of Texas has already signed an executive order making its use mandatory for schoolgirls."
Wrong Info on Blog (Score:5, Informative)
1. The blog states the vaccine only decreases the chance--that's wrong. If you have not been previously infected with HPV then there is a 100% effective rate.
2. In 2007 the incidence of cervical cancer went up.
3. Yep, it is the most expensive, however it is the ONLY vaccine which prevent cancer and DEATH. (And yeah it made $70 million, chump change for a company which made $22 billion in 2006).
4. Wrong. Gardasil is already a part of this program. Having a mandate will not change liability at all.
5. There is 5 year data now with another 3 1/2 year data prior to the launch of the drug; that's 8 1/2 years of data now.
6. This is true, however, in the current data there has been no wane in the immunity; and vaccines typically never need booster shots due to the way vaccines work.
7. Yes, neither was any other drug on the market.
8. Pure speculation. There has been no proof that aluminum is harmful. Gardasil was tested with Hepatitis B because it has the same aluminum compound and has been on the market for 19 years.
9. There are currently studies going on with boys and safety data is already available for boys in the label. Also, the EU and Australia are already using on boys.
10. It's ironic that the blog ends with making an uninformed decision when all the facts are wrong on the site.
Yeah, this seems like a shrill for Gardasil but I have personal knowledge of this drug and sometimes setting the facts straight on a drug which is saving lives need some truth out there among the free range blogs which aren't providing accurate information.
Re:Not the government's responsibility (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Naming (Score:3, Informative)
And a hell of a lot cheaper than $400 x 2 million woman/children every year a mandatory vaccination would call for.
Further, of the HPV strains which are linked to cancer (there's about a dozen or so), the two vaccines only block 2 and 3 respective.
Re:Not the government's responsibility (Score:5, Informative)
More to the point, I'm not sure people realize just how easy it is to contract HPV. Not only that, but there really aren't any tests for males. It usually shows no symptoms, though I think that certain types result in genital warts.
Sex isn't even necessary to contract it. A large chunk of the adult population has it and doesn't know it. I could have it, for all I know. But it causes cervical cancer.
Re:Gimme a break (Score:5, Informative)
You can't really eradicate a disease through a program of voluntary vaccination.
*As an aside, you may have heard that this vaccine will be voluntary, blah blah blah. That's because the Federal Law has an exemption such that your child does not have to be vaccinated against anything to attend school, as long as you claim it goes against your religious (defined as moral or ethical) beliefs. Legally, you don't have to go into any further details to get an exemption. Just put it in writing & send it to the school.
Re:A little perspective first (Score:3, Informative)
A little background for your benefit:
There are about 100 types of HPV. About a dozen-twenty are linked to about 80% of cervical cancers. The vaccine in question (Gardasil) offers resistance to 4 of them which account for the (around 90%) of HPV linked cancers. That still leaves a HUGE number of HPV strains for which there is no vaccine that have been linked to cervical cancer. That also leaves non-hpv linked cervical cancer.
You're statement that "only those few types of HPV cause cervical cancer" is untrue. There are many. It would, however, be true to say that most hpv-linked cancers are casued by 4 different strains of HPV.
Re:Vaccination based on assumption (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Vaccine Safety? (Score:2, Informative)
Seriously? 'Considering the track records of previous vaccines?' Does the word polio mean anything to you? The track records of previous vaccines suggest that they've saved millions of lives, Cynical Jim.
also prevents 90% of genital warts cases (Score:3, Informative)
A few more interesting tidbits:
-- At least 80% of women will have been infected [cdc.gov] by at least one strain of genital HPV by the time they reach 50 years of age.
-- Condoms are only about 70% effective [cbsnews.com] at preventing HPV transmission
-- In 2007, approximately 11,150 cases of invasive cervical cancer will be diagnosed in the United States, and about 3,670 women will die [cancer.org] from the disease. For comparison, seatbelts saved 13,274 lives in 2001 [dot.gov] in the US.
-- Somewhere near 10% of people [cdc.gov] have had visible genital warts. These people may still be able to transmit the virus after the warts are gone.
-- HPV can be transmitted from a mother to baby during birth [nih.gov], so it is even possible to get HPV from a virgin.
-- The HPV vaccine does not contain thimerosal/mercury [fda.gov].
Re:What do they think? (Score:1, Informative)
I don't normally post here, but I'm sick of hearing reactionary arguments like this. While cervical cancer is devastating and I fully support making this vaccine available on the market, I for one would most certainly not have my daughter vaccinated until it has been in WIDE SPREAD USE for at least 5 or more years, and I FERVENTLY opposed making it mandatory because of the lobbying of a drug company.
So while some of you are happy to line your daughters up as consumer testers stage 1, I think I'm going to show a bit more caution and reserve with my most important and irreplaceable things.
Oh, and for the record I'm not particularly religious and I'm very much a political liberal - so yeah, the Christian wingnut thing most certainly doesn't apply.
Re:Whose side are you on? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Rationality expired a while ago. (Score:3, Informative)
Despite the inflammatory name on the link to the blog article, it isn't mandatory. Even the article contradicts itself in the first paragraph:
On Saturday, February 3, Texas Governor Rick Perry signed an executive order to make the newly-released human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine Gardasil mandatory for all young girls before entry into the sixth grade. Starting in the 2008-2009 school year, the new bill would allow parents to opt out of the vaccination if they provide documentation of religious or philosophical opposition.
The ability to opt-out is already in Texas law, and reportedly applies to all vaccinations. When Perry announced his executive order, he added that the HPV vaccination was voluntary.
Note that I'm not defending or promoting either side of this issue. I'm just pointing out that there's a lot of misinformation being hurled around, in an attempt to influence opinions.