Guardasil [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Guardasil


MrsKitty
06-02-2008, 17:26
I am sure I spelled that wrong. I read somewhere this weekend that although insurance companies aren't covering it yet, Guardasil is showing hope for helping prevent HPV in older women so long as they get vaccinated prior to infection which can reduce risks for cervical cancer.

I have been wanting to be vaccinated since it was released due to our family history but no doctor was willing to do it since I am outside of the normal age for it.

I thought some of you other wimmens might want to follow this, too. :wavey:

RickD6023
06-02-2008, 17:54
Billing for Gardasil is being accepted by most insurance plans right now for those women within the normal approved age range. Here is the factual information from the Merck website

Help protect a generation from future risk

Only GARDASIL helps protect against multiple HPV types

†AIS=adenocarcinoma in situ.
‡CIN=cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

GARDASIL is a vaccine indicated in girls and women 9 to 26 years of age for the prevention of cervical cancer, precancerous or dysplastic lesions, and genital warts caused by HPV Types 6, 11, 16, and 18.

> Learn how to help protect girls and young women.

Select safety information

GARDASIL is contraindicated in individuals who are hypersensitive to the active substances or to any of the excipients of the vaccine.

Vaccination with GARDASIL may not result in protection in all vaccine recipients.

GARDASIL is not intended to be used for treatment of active genital warts; cervical cancer; cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia, or ******l intraepithelial neoplasia.

GARDASIL does not substitute for routine cervical cancer screening, and women who receive GARDASIL should continue to undergo screening per standard of care.

GARDASIL has not been shown to protect against diseases due to non-vaccine HPV types.

The duration of protection of GARDASIL is unknown at present. GARDASIL will not protect against diseases that are not caused by HPV.

The vaccine-related adverse experiences that were observed among recipients of GARDASIL at a frequency of at least 1.0% and greater than placebo were pain, swelling, erythema, fever, nausea, pruritus, and dizziness. In addition, common postmarketing reports include vomiting and syncope.

As with all injectable vaccines, appropriate medical treatment should always be readily available in case of rare anaphylactic reactions following the administration of the vaccine.

A complete vaccination regimen of GARDASIL consists of a 3-dose schedule.

I am a proponent of every girl being vaccinated. Gardasil while expensive is well worth the investment. It is a three-dose given at a set interval. You can expect to pay $150 a dose for each dose if you are a cash paying patient.

Swattie's Wife
06-03-2008, 20:57
I THOUGHT I HAD to get this vaccine to my daughter. So I made the appointment and she was given the 1st, and made the appointment for the 2nd and then waited for the time for the 3rd shot. After the 3rd shot was given she was having a "female problem" so I made an appointment with my ob/gyn doctor. I had mentioned that she had already been given the shots for GARDASIL and she replied "oh, how long has she been sexually active?", at which time my jaw dropped to the floor. I said she's not. She said UNLESS she's sexually active their was no need for the shots. I didn't know that. That is what my doctor told me anyways. I asked another doctor I sometimes see and she verified that. It wouldn't hurt to ask your doctor though either. That is just what my doctor told me though.

RickD6023
06-03-2008, 22:20
According to all of the information I have read and provided to the public during health fairs it is best to get the vaccination prior to becoming sexually active. If you wait, then there is a possibility to become infected. Vaccines are preventative, not post protection.

MrsKitty
06-05-2008, 16:10
I think you did right getting it even if you believe she isn't sexually active now. A vaccine is to prevent and that has to happen beforehand. I think these doctors are playing with splitting hairs on this.

Better to be safe than sorry. :)

MB-G26
06-07-2008, 21:27
earlier while crusing google news, I saw these:

Gardasil Side Effects Still Being Reported
Newsinferno.com, NY - Jun 6, 2008
In January, we reported on the deaths of two young women oversees that were apparently linked to Gardasil. Those deaths followed the deaths of three other ...
http://www.newsinferno.com/archives/3222

HPV vaccine's suspected side effects cause concern; CDC says drug ...
Dallas Morning News, TX - Jun 6, 2008
s vaccine division, which makes Gardasil, said Thursday that the company conducted clinical trials for 10 years and that it remains confident in its product ...
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/fea/healthyliving2/stories/060608dnmetvaccine.31383ea.html

Suspected Side Effects of HPV Vaccine Raises Concerns
KWTX, TX - Jun 6, 2008
(June 6, 2008)—After nearly two years on the market, concerns about the HPV Vaccine Gardasil® have arisen in North Texas. According to the Centers for ...
http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/19596274.html

Gardasil Controversy
WHOI, IL - Jun 2, 2008
By Jen Christensen Parents are coming out against Gardasil, the vaccine that prevents cervical cancer. Some doctors say the bad reactions cited by the ...
http://www.hoinews.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=141860

Mrs. VR
06-07-2008, 22:46
How can they say that something that has only been tested for ten years is going to be safe long term? this really bugs me. That and the fact that many vaccines need boosters at some point. We could be creating an entire generation of women with new health problems because the vaccine was released before they could know for SURE what was going to happen long term.

Mrs. Tink
06-09-2008, 14:39
How can they say that something that has only been tested for ten years is going to be safe long term? this really bugs me. That and the fact that many vaccines need boosters at some point. We could be creating an entire generation of women with new health problems because the vaccine was released before they could know for SURE what was going to happen long term.

What bothers me is all the talk of REQUIRING it for kids.

Parents should be free to do what they want in terms of vaccines for their kids.

No way would I give a vaccine that has not been proven safe over decades to my child.

RickD6023
06-09-2008, 15:28
What bothers me is all the talk of REQUIRING it for kids.

Parents should be free to do what they want in terms of vaccines for their kids.

No way would I give a vaccine that has not been proven safe over decades to my child.

That's an interesting approach to medicine. Can you imagine where we would be today if we tested the polio vaccine for decades before we made it mandatory for our children? How many lives would have been impacted by the dibilitating effects of polio? Yet today, polio is almost unheard of worldwide.

We can not place unreasonable restrictions on the development and distribution of medicines. I only wish that my daughter was eligible for the vaccine for I would do anything to help her avoid the diseases that Gardisil prevents.

Mrs. Tink
06-09-2008, 15:37
That's an interesting approach to medicine. Can you imagine where we would be today if we tested the polio vaccine for decades before we made it mandatory for our children? How many lives would have been impacted by the dibilitating effects of polio? Yet today, polio is almost unheard of worldwide.

We can not place unreasonable restrictions on the development and distribution of medicines. I only wish that my daughter was eligible for the vaccine for I would do anything to help her avoid the diseases that Gardisil prevents.

Shunning vaccines is not my "approach to medicine." I have a chronic illness and have utmost faith in my numerous doctors and medications. However, I maintain that Gardasil is different. Polio, chicken pox, measles and the like are stealthy, invisible pathogens that strike indiscriminately. Vaccinating children against such biological agents is commonly accepted. Gardasil is designed to prevent a problem that few elementary school girls will have (the low end of the range is NINE years old) and one that is certainly not spread by merely being in the same room as one who has been afflicted.

Most people will, understandably, throw caution to the winds and ensure that their daughters receive Gardasil. However, in this case, you cannot blame parents who are wary.

sweetatergal
06-10-2008, 14:31
I've seen the commercials, and I'm undecided if I will even have my 2 girls vaccinated for this. They are only 8 and 5 right now, so I still have a few years to ponder on it.

I've had the abnormal cells (back in the early/mid 90's) and the doctors said then it was the HPV. Luckly mine were not cancerous(I had the "cone" precedure done 3 days BEFORE I got married) and I've had normal results ever since.

After having children and having to have them go through all the vaccinations that they have to have just to go to either daycare or kindergarten, if I could have opted out on any of them it would have been the chicken pox shot.

Mrs. VR
06-10-2008, 22:04
Our first pediatrician actually advised AGAINST the chicken pox shot. At the time it was new, and he said it was really for parents who didn't want or couldn't take time off of work if their kids caught it. He said it hadn't been tested long enough to know if kids were going to need boosters to prevent getting it as adolescents or adults (getting it in teenage years can cause sterility), and sure enough, he was right. The kids are now needing boosters. People who are good about giving kids early vaccines don't always follow up later. I know that in rare cases it can be a very serious, even fatal illness, but so can the flu.

I have a real issue with this one, and the Hep-B being mandatory. My babies weren't exchanging bodily fluids with anyone but me, and that's how the majority of Hep-B is spread.

According to the CDC:


Occurs when blood from an infected person enters the body of a person who is not infected.
HBV is spread through having sex with an infected person without using a condom (the efficacy of latex condoms in preventing infection with HBV is unknown, but their proper use might reduce transmission), by sharing drugs, needles, or "works" when injecting drugs, through needlesticks or sharps exposures on the job, or from an infected mother to her baby during birth.WHY IS THIS MANDATORY FOR CHILDREN TO GO TO SCHOOL???

sweetatergal
06-11-2008, 11:42
I found out from my Pediatrician that the chicken pox shot DOES not prevent them from getting it, it just keeps them from getting a bad case of them. When I found this out, I was about to refuse my youngest the shot because that means that she could get it multiple times (which *I* would STILL have to take off from work to take care of her) and they drop the bomb that they can not go to school without the shot. :steamed:(oh, and my 5 yr old had to have a 2nd chicken pox shot when she got her boosters to start school....my oldest did not) Plus the Ped. was telling me about the virus that can cause death if a child has a bad case of the chicken pox. I wanted to see the numbers of childred that had died from this virus, but of course she could not provide any info for me.

Mrs VR, you bring up a good point about the Hepititus shot as well. I never thought of it that way. Unless they are banking on a mother having it and a child contracting it from her. Then the child goes to school, gets cut or something of that nature. :dunno:

Mrs. VR
06-11-2008, 14:20
I would have been perfectly happy to let them test ME for it. I really truly don't like not having a say in health decisions that involve my kids. Remember this one?:

Rotavirus Vaccine
The tetravalent, oral, live rotavirus vaccine, RotaShield® (Wyeth-Ayherst), was approved for use in infants by the FDA on August 31, 1998. Rotavirus is a 70-nanometer-diameter icosahedral virus composed of three capsid protein layers and 11 double-stranded RNA segments.<sup>31 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=hstat6.biblist.2160#2191)</sup> It contains three major antigenic proteins, one of which, viral protein 7 (VP7) a G-type surface protein, is specifically used in the tetravalent RotaShield vaccine. Using gene reassortment, the VP7 gene from three of the four human serotypes was incorporated into the rhesus rotavirus, making three single-gene human-rhesus reassortants. The VP7 gene present in the native rhesus rotavirus strain provides immunity to the fourth human serotype.<sup>******** language="JavaScript1.2"><!-- var Menu_id1295970 = [ ["PubMed","window.top.location='http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=9832589'","",""], ["Bibliography","window.top.location='/books/bv.fcgi?rid=hstat6.biblist.2160#2187'","",""], ["Help","window.open('/books/popup.html','Links_Help','resizable=no,scrollbars=yes,toolbar=no,location=no,directories=no,status=n o,menubar=no,copyhistory=no,width=400,height=500');","",""] ] --></script>27 (javascript:PopUpMenu2_Set(Menu_id1295970);)</sup> Using a combination of the native rhesus rotavirus and the three reassortant strains, the tetravalent RotaShield will protect against all four significant human rotavirus serotypes.




On July 15, 1999, the CDC recommended that use of the newly licensed rotavirus vaccine be suspended until at least November of 1999, due to reports of possible increases in intussusception rates in vaccinated infants.<sup>3 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=hstat6.biblist.2160#2163)</sup> Prior to that, the rotavirus vaccine had been recommended for universal use in infants by the ACIP in March of 1999.<sup>2 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=hstat6.biblist.2160#2162)</sup> However, on October 22, 1999, the ACIP, after a review of scientific data which indicated a strong association between RotaShield and intussusception among some infants during the first 1-2 weeks following vaccination, withdrew its recommendation of the RotaShield® vaccine.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=hstat6.section.2099


grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

sweetatergal
06-11-2008, 15:05
I do remember something vagly about it. Luckly for me, they had suspended the use of it before I had my oldest (Sept 1999) and then done away with it completly when she was only a couple months old.

I've shocked some people because I refuse to take a flu shot and so does my Hubby. The one time that he did take the flu shot, he wound up sick for a week with the flu. :upeyes: (He only took it because his employeer paid for the shot)

Swattie's Wife
06-12-2008, 21:27
I do remember something vagly about it. Luckly for me, they had suspended the use of it before I had my oldest (Sept 1999) and then done away with it completly when she was only a couple months old.

I've shocked some people because I refuse to take a flu shot and so does my Hubby. The one time that he did take the flu shot, he wound up sick for a week with the flu. :upeyes: (He only took it because his employeer paid for the shot)

One of my friends who is an RN said that the flu vaccine is the strain of flu from the year BEFORE. I got the flu shot (never again) and caught this "new strain" of that was going around. That new strain was HORRIBLE!

I also have a friend that took her baby in for his baby shots. Well, now, they have like a bzillion of shots every few months (compared to when my kids were little). Because he was given all these shots in such a short amount of time he now has Autism (doctors confirmed that the shots were the cause of this). I know that the actor Jim Carrey and his "wife" are fighting to change the way of baby shots since their son has Autism (from the shots they argue).

GLOCKNROCK
05-05-2009, 08:24
All in all it is still a parents right to vax or not. Just because everyone is doing it doesn't make it right. Women are herded into hospitals to give birth as if it is an acute medical disease. Too bad people don't inform themselves these days.
On the vaxing issue, many parents are made to feel that there is no choice. They are told that it is a requirement in order for their child to get into school and the like. Most states, however, do allow parents to submit a waiver against vaxing due to religious or philosophical beliefs. It's too bad that so many people are uninformed. Vaxing according to today's schedule is very risky and most children do suffer some side effects. Experiences range from mild to severe. Common side effects are itching and redness at the injection site, fever (due to swelling of the brain) due to the lack of a blood-brain barrier in children newborn to age 3. The list goes on and on. My wife has befriended many other mothers through networking with her business. Among the many friends she has made, there are so many who have had many problems with their vaccinated children ranging from high fever (lasting 8-48 hours), sudden appearance of autism within days of vaxing, and one of her girlfriends lost her daughter within 24 hours of receiving the hepatitis vaccine that is "required" just after birth.
It is up to parents to inform themselves and then make the right decision for their children. My wife, after months of research gave birth completely naturally with no drugs with a midwife standing by if needed. She breast fed both of our daughters until they naturally weened themselves (breast is best), and we did not pump our daughters up full of a bunch of dead or weakened viruses mixed with egg, simian or aborted fetal tissue and harmful chemical preservatives. Their biological chemistry is so fragile, so why bombard them with more work than their little bodies are ready for? Parents can break up the vaxing schedule over a period of years with fewer individual vaccines at each vaxing visit. Instead, people are going to continue doing it because everyone they know does it and thinks "oh, it's safe since that's what I'm told by the government." Wow... so much for critical thinking and questioning the motives of others.

SouthernGal
05-05-2009, 10:47
I am sure I spelled that wrong. I read somewhere this weekend that although insurance companies aren't covering it yet, Guardasil is showing hope for helping prevent HPV in older women so long as they get vaccinated prior to infection which can reduce risks for cervical cancer.

I have been wanting to be vaccinated since it was released due to our family history but no doctor was willing to do it since I am outside of the normal age for it.

I thought some of you other wimmens might want to follow this, too. :wavey:

Clinical trials have indicated that this vaccine is effective in women as old as 45.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/87722.php

Also, some people aren't aware that condoms provide only limited protection in the spread of HPV.

Tailhunter
05-05-2009, 11:40
How can they say that something that has only been tested for ten years is going to be safe long term? this really bugs me. That and the fact that many vaccines need boosters at some point. We could be creating an entire generation of women with new health problems because the vaccine was released before they could know for SURE what was going to happen long term.

Thank you ....

GLOCKNROCK
05-05-2009, 12:30
That's an interesting approach to medicine. Can you imagine where we would be today if we tested the polio vaccine for decades before we made it mandatory for our children? How many lives would have been impacted by the dibilitating effects of polio?

Polio, as well as many other debilitating illnesses, was in steady decline when vaccination became available. The vaccine did wonders in a short time. Gardasil is causing horrible side effects in many people and only protects some people against a few strains of HPV that cause cervical cancer. It's not a fail safe plan. Teaching one's children about the risks of sex can also go a long way.

LadyG23
05-07-2009, 06:59
Gardasil - another Merck product. The makers of Vioxx.

I worked on the Vioxx trial - and I saw enough documents from Merck to never trust anything they say or manufacture. They knew about the Vioxx problem, lied to the FDA all because they had patents expiring and needed a new money maker. Now they have settlements to pay for Vioxx . . . and a new moneymaker - Gardasil.

Neither my daughter or I will get this vaccine.

coachg
05-07-2009, 07:08
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrs. VR View Post
How can they say that something that has only been tested for ten years is going to be safe long term? this really bugs me. That and the fact that many vaccines need boosters at some point. We could be creating an entire generation of women with new health problems because the vaccine was released before they could know for SURE what was going to happen long term.

What bothers me is all the talk of REQUIRING it for kids.

Parents should be free to do what they want in terms of vaccines for their kids.

No way would I give a vaccine that has not been proven safe over decades to my child.

Two very smart women. I would proceed with caution. Do the research and then decide if it works for you and your family.

FrogWithAGlock
05-08-2009, 14:55
I wouldn't touch Gardasil with a 10-foot pole. My daughters will NOT be getting Gardasil.

I actually did some in-depth reading on the issue, as Colorado was trying to pass a law making it mandatory for 11 year old girls to get the vaccine (funded by Merck, who makes it).

Reasons I am opposed?

1. Not tested in children, yet here, and many other states, they want to give it to girls - not boys, just girls).
2.MERCK, the manufacturer, has a long history of falsifying info to get things passed through the FDA - remember VIOXX?? Document after document proved Merck new during trials, that VIOXX would KILL a certain percentage of patients. It was a financial decision to HIDE the info from the FDA. I considered VIOXX for my bad knees, but was excluded by my doc, due to a past liver issue. When the known heart problems came to light, I was thankful for a bum liver.


Here's a big one:
3. Gardasil attacks the Human Papilloma virus. Some forms of HPV may lead to cervical cancer. Yet Gardasil attacks ALL HPV.... including strains of regular warts. That's right, folks, if you've had a wart (genitla or OTHERWISE), Gardasil may harm or even kill you.. It is only effective if administered PRIOR to sexual activity of any kind, and only good for 5 years. No one knows what happens after a 2nd injection.


I am generally very PRO vaccine. But with tthe deaths caused by Gardasil, the questions surrounding it, the company trying to push legislation to FORCE children to get it, etc.......


Ask me again in 20 years. But for now, it seems the cure is more dangerous than the disease.

FrogWithAGlock
05-08-2009, 15:04
I found out from my Pediatrician that the chicken pox shot DOES not prevent them from getting it, it just keeps them from getting a bad case of them. When I found this out, I was about to refuse my youngest the shot because that means that she could get it multiple times (which *I* would STILL have to take off from work to take care of her) and they drop the bomb that they can not go to school without the shot. :steamed:(oh, and my 5 yr old had to have a 2nd chicken pox shot when she got her boosters to start school....my oldest did not) Plus the Ped. was telling me about the virus that can cause death if a child has a bad case of the chicken pox. I wanted to see the numbers of childred that had died from this virus, but of course she could not provide any info for me.

Mrs VR, you bring up a good point about the Hepititus shot as well. I never thought of it that way. Unless they are banking on a mother having it and a child contracting it from her. Then the child goes to school, gets cut or something of that nature. :dunno:

They lied to you. You simply have to fill out a form stating your child is NOT getting the vaccine, due to personal religious or health concerns, and acknowledging that your child will have to stay home, should an outbreak occur.

Of course, no one tells you that, because they want to scare you into complying. Again, I am pro-vaccine, in general. But I still choose which ones and when, as every parent should. Don't let them take your rights as a parent away.


I also will not let my kids get Hep C vaccines. I am not giving them dangerous injections, simply to protect "just in case" they have risky sexual behavior later. THey can do it themselves, when they are old enough to decide.

POLIO, as well as others, I am absolutely OK with giving to my child. My mom had polio (and scarlet fever, measles, mumps, rubella.... you name it, she got it). NOT fun. She was days from an iron lung, and started showing improvement.

There are illnesses that constitute a public health concern. HPV is not on e of them. You cannot get it from casual contact, standing in the lunch line, etc. It is not airborne. Therefore, it is not something I would immunize against, unless and until I see MINIMUM of 20 years actual evidenve it saves lives, without killing people first.

Mrs.Cicero
05-10-2009, 14:59
I have friends and relatives who had polio (friend now suffering from post-polio syndrome), scarlet fever (my dad - out of school for a full year, w/heart valve damage), measles (uncle, the fever did serious damage), mumps, rubella... my kids got those shots...
tho' i made sure they were thimerosal-free due to other relative's terrible reaction to a tetanus w/thimerosal booster (she spent the next 7 years in constant joint pain, among other things).
As far as gardasil (and anything else to come down the pike that is for tx of STD), my daughters will make the decision THEMSELVES, when they are old enough to do so legally.
I am grateful to have the vaccines against diseases with a measurable lethality. However, I have serious issues with vaccines for diseases (like chicken pox) that are so low in lethality, that the vaccine itself is liable to cause equivalent suffering or deaths due to side effects. Personally, I think the development of the chicken pox vaccine was driven more by profit for the drug companies, and convenience for parents who don't want to stay home for work for two weeks w/ a child down with CP, than by any real concern for the health of children. Unfortunately, we now have a generation of children, now teens, who have never had CP, and are basically vaccine dependent, since getting CP outside of childhood is dangerous (deafness, sterility, death). If the vaccine needs a booster every 10 years, they are now stuck with that "solution", and God help them if it is ever determined that the vaccine must come off the market and they are left unprotected as adults - esp since the vast majority would have come thru a childhood case of CP just fine.
This is the kind of short term thinking I find so heinous on the part of drug companies and the gov't that requires vaccine use.
Mrs.C

LadyG23
05-10-2009, 21:13
My first two children (pre CP vaccine) got chicken pox like most kids. My second two got the vaccine . . and chicken pox TWICE. They missed twice as much school (and I missed twice as much work) . . . Had I known, I would have never gotten the vaccine to start with.