I would hope that if a parent is faced with the option of helping to prevent their child from contracting an STD and, potentially, a form of cancer, that he or she would be all for it. While reading through the article, I found myself asking the question: 'why would a parent or guardian DISagree with having their child receive this vaccination?'
Some individuals argue that the vaccine is "the motives of a drug company that stands to make big profits" and "politicians who may be pandering for votes." Whether or not this is the case, I don't believe that it is a good enough excuse for your daughter not to receive the vaccine. 80% of women contract the HPV virus and an attempt to stop it is better than nothing.
Another poor excuse for a girl not receiving the vaccine is "feeling a certain queasiness about dosing girls as young as 10 years old with protection for an STD." Eventually, every (or most) girls are going to become sexually active and I would hope parents would be able to face this reality in order to protect their children.
In the video below, Bill Maher discusses The HPV Vaccine vs. Sexual Promiscuity:
But, of course, there is one legitimate argument concerning the "fear of side effects." Because the drug is fairly new, some parents are worrying about the possible side effects that may come in the future. I would hope that before distributing the vaccine to hundreds of girls, scientists would have studied and tested the vaccination to the best of their ability.
Although I would have my daughter receive the vaccination, it is essentially up to the parents and the child as to whether they are willing to risk unknown future side effects to protect against a known cause of cancer. Of course, parents should research before allowing their daughter to receive the vaccination as there are some known side effects that effect a rare amount of young girls after receiving the vaccination.
1 comment:
yer so good at blogging
Post a Comment