Foodconsumer.org

 
USCards.com Bookmark Us
All Food, Diet and Health News 
 
 Misc. News
 Must-Read News
 Letter to Editor
 Featured Products
 Recalls & Alerts
 Consumer Affair
 Non-food Things
 Health Tips
 Interesting Sites
 
 Diet & Health
 Heart & Blood
 Cancer
 Body Weight
 Children & Women
 General Health
 Nutrition
 
 Food & Health
 Food Chemicals
 Biological Agents
 Cooking & Packing
 Technologies
 Agri. & Environ.
 Laws & Politics
 
 General Health
 Drug News
 Diseases
 Mental Health
 Infectious Disease
 Environment
 Lifestyle
 Government
 Other News
 
 Food Consumer
 FC News & Others
Search





Search Foodconsumer & Others


Add to Google
Add to My Yahoo
Newsfeed

foodconsumer.org news feed
Su bmit news[release]



More than 100 credit cards available at uscards.com from uscards.com, you can pick more than 100 credit cards


Misc. News : Letter to Editor Last Updated: Apr 20, 2011 - 9:38:09 AM


California may mandate HPV vaccine for girls
By Dorothy M. Neddermeyer, PhD
Feb 11, 2007 - 7:48:20 AM

E.mail t.his a.rticle
 P.rinter f.riendly p.age
Get n.ewsletter
 
   
Assembly woman Sally Lieber, D-Mountain View, California., recently introduced legislation that would require girls to be immunized against HPV before they enter the sixth grade.

The Federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that parents get the vaccine for their daughters, ideally when they're age 11 and 12. The proposal to mandate vaccination in California, AB16, is giving young girls the wrong message, because HPV is transmitted only through sexual contact. Not all 11 and 12 year old girls have sexual contact, yet they will be ‘forced’ to be vaccinated and suffer the short and long-term side effects. Reported short-term side effects include:

• Pain, swelling, itching and redness at the injection site
• Fever
• Nausea
• Dizziness
• Difficulty breathing

The vaccine has not been tested long enough to determine long-term side effects, which could include:

• Sterility
• Contracting HPV
• Emotional conflict—guilt/shame/humiliation as a result of being led to believe sex beginning at 11 or 12 is healthy as long as one has the HPV vaccination

If CA legislates required vaccination for HPV, where will this end? As Assemblyman Chuck DeVore, R-Irvine stated regarding legalizing banning spanking of children "Where do you stop?" He said he agrees children younger than 3 should not be spanked but has no desire to make it the law. "At what point are we going to say we should pass a bill that every parent has to read a minimum of 30 minutes every night to their child? This is right along those same lines."

However, legislating every 11 - 12 year-old girl must be vaccinated for HPV is a different matter entirely. Legislating the ban of hitting children a.k.a. abuse of children affords them the opportunity to enjoy the same protection afforded to all adults. Legislating every girl age 11 – 12 be vaccinated for HPV gives a message that sex is a rite to passage at that age. Is that the message we want to legislate?

A law to require anyone to be vaccinated for anything serves two purposes.

• Big business and government taking more and more control of the people.

• Creating a lucrative income for doctors, pharmacies and drug manufacturers.

Disease is merely the body crying for support to do the job it is designed to do. Your body can heal itself and prevent disease given it has adequate nutrition, vitamins and mineral supplements and peace of mind. Your body needs nothing more.

Dorothy M. Neddermeyer, PhD, author, 101 Great Ways To Improve Your Life, specializes in: Mind, Body, Spirit healing and Physical/Sexual Abuse Prevention and Recovery. As an inspirational leader, Dr. Neddermeyer empowers people to view life's challenges as an opportunity to create a healthier life. http://www.drdorothy.net


Editor's note:  Those who count on Merck's HPV vaccine to prevent cervical cancer need to know that they have many other greater risks to worry about.  Their girls/women have at least five times higher risk of dying in a traffic accident than cervical cancer. They have at least ten times higher risk of dying from breast cancer than from cervical cancer.  They have 100 times higher risk of dying from incidents related to drugs and doctors. Trans fat may kill 50,000 women a year.  Compared to all these and other risks, 3,500 deaths of cervical cancer per year in the whole country is nothing. That does not mean you should not take this disease seriously.  The point is that parents need to train their girls to follow a healthy lifestyle including abstinence and practicing safe sex if they could not control themselves.  In doing so, their girls can reduce drastically the overall risk of death from incidents and all diseases including cervical cancer.  

With regard to the HPV vaccine, there are basically two issues: the long term efficacy and safety of the vaccine and the parents’ right to making their medical decisions for their children.  With the long term efficacy and safety uncertain, inoculating of your girls with this anti cervical cancer vaccine may potentially cause more harm than good.  Even if the vaccine proves effective and safe for 100 years and even if 100 percent of parents agree to have their daughters inoculated with this cervical cancer vaccine, it still should leave the decision to the parents.  


Realted news stories:

Perry's vaccine order saves lives, but at high price

Illinois to consider cervical cancer vaccine for girls

Merck's HPV vaccine may be more protective than thought

HPV vaccine: Questions and Answers

Lawmakers ask Perry to rescind vaccine order

HPV vaccine: What you need to know

Should girls be forced to receive HPV vaccine?








© 2004-2008 by foodconsumer.org unless otherwise specified

Top of Page




Google
 
Web foodconsumer.org

Search Consumer-friendly Health Sites












We have moved to Food Consumer . Org



disclaimer | advertising | jobs | privacy | about us | newsletter | Submit news/articles
link partners: | Buy Viagra | MarketAmerica.com |
Buy a home | Auto Insurance | Mortgage refinancing | DaytonaCPA.com | Take Your Blog to a Higher Level
© Copyright 2004 - 2008 foodconsumer.org All rights reserved

Disclaimer: What's published on this website should be considered opinions of respective writers only and foodconsumer.org which has no political agenda nor commercial ambition may or may not endorse any opinion of any writer. No accuracy is guaranteed although writers are doing their best to provide accurate information only. The information on this website should not be construed as medical advice and should not be used to replace professional services provided by qualified or licensed health care workers. The site serves only as a platform for writers and readers to share knowledge, experience, and information from the scientific community, organizations, government agencies and individuals. Foodconsumer.org encourages readers who have had medical conditions to consult with licensed health care providers - conventional and or alternative medical practitioners.