Rick Perry raised eyebrows at the Republican debate Monday night when he voiced his support for the enforcement of the HPV shot, Gardasil, for teenage girls in Texas. Although the reason for his avid support for the vaccine might just be for his murky connections with Merck, a pharmaceutical giant and avid Perry endorser, Perry seemed blatant when he quickly diverted the debate to his questionable fund raising methods. "If you think I can be bought for 5,000 dollars, I'm offended," says Perry.
"I'm offended for all the little girls who didn't have a choice," fired Michelle Bauchmann to the somewhat egotistical response from Perry.
Most of the other republican candidates fired back about mandating the HPV shot in Texas, stating that "personal liberties had been violated". Personally, I don't see how any politician can force a vaccine to become required without raising massive protest. Then again, it also brings up a repetitive topic of government control over health care. How much control does the government have over such a big part of our lives? Since Merck is the sole producer of Gardasil, it also poses the question of how much control does Merck have on the spread and supply of the vaccine in Texas. Ladies, how would you feel if you were forced to undertake a foreign vaccine just at the whim of some politician?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I definitely would not appreciate being forced to get an immunization. First of all, every human's health conditions are different and no one can predict the side effects on an individual's body. Gardasil may be beneficial, but some may not want a mysterious medication running through their veins. The government should have no right to control what kinds of medications we recieve, and especially not Gardasil since it is so personal. Medications are specific to one's conditions so the only control the government should have is maybe promote it.
What I'm curious about is how everybody would feel if the government didn't force anybody to take any vaccines at all? Probably pretty bad seeing as people would be suffering from diseases like measles, small pox, and polio. Our government has an obligation to protect the health of its people and this country would be a much worse place to live if everyone was allowed complete liberty in making decisions about their health. Before you start complaining about the government forcing things on you, consider the huge benefits you are receiving.
And this bit about Merck being the sole producer of Gardasil is a ridiculous complaint. That is how the patent system and private development of new medicine in general work. One company invents the drug and that same company gets to be the sole manufacturer until the patent expires.
I agree with Gabe because we need some vaccinations to be required (like this year and the whooping cough, you have to have your vaccination in order to attend school). In addition, when any company develops a drug, each drug goes through at least five stages of rigorous testing on hundred is not thousands of subjects so that the company can figure out most of the possible side effects and how to treat the side effects as well.
I feel that Gardasil might be a special case, however, he is making available to thousands of girls that would not have had access to this potentially life-saving vaccination. Which, in my opinion is a good thing.
-Sophia Wienbar
I have to agree with Gabe and Sophia. I really enjoy the fact that government does mandate some vaccination. I like having the knowledge that I can walk into a classroom at Aragon and not fear that I have a high risk of getting T.B. because I got the vaccine for it and I can pretty much assume that everyone else got it too. This may be a stretch, but I think it helps the economy out too. With less people falling victim to illnesses, the more workers there are at one time in the businesses, the more profit can be made due to increased worker output. With more money, more funding can be given to medical research centers, which can then devote more of that money to better research techniques and/or resources. This could mean a quicker solution to a cure for even more types of cancer and a more effective treatment for HIV. Just another reason why the economy is good for your health.
In a direct comment to Gardasil, I going to go out on a limb and say why would mandating this be all that bad? I read a few things about HPV, and to be honest, I really hope they get Gardasil as a mandatory vaccine. HPV does not look like a fun STD or illnesses at all. Seeing as it is one of the most common on top of that, I think a vaccine would be great. I going to have to give Rick Perry this one. I don't agree with him on most everything he says, but on this I think he has a relatively good idea (even if it is just to line his pocket along with Merck).
In my previous comment, I believe there is a part in which I forgot to put "I am" and instead just put "I," making my grammar slightly off. Just in case my grammar plays a vital role in that particular sentence, I will type it again, corrected, here: "I am going to have to give Rick Perry this one." The rest of what I said is, hopefully, above this comment.
I absolutely agree with what Gabe said, and I have to say that those opposed to the idea of government mandated vaccinations should recognize the flaw in their logic. I think that rather than opposing the vaccination which does have huge societal benefits, people are more in opposition because of the idea that the the government is "forcing" something on them, despite the fact that it is a legitimate health and safety measure. I respectfully disagree with those opposed to the vaccination.
According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (a government agency), over 50% of sexually active Americans contract HPV at some point in their lives.
Moreover, cervical cancer, which is associated with HPV, is dangerous because it is relatively symptomatic during early stages. Often, women who do not get regular gynecologist checkups do not discover they have cervical cancer until it is too late to treat.
If anything can be said about Perry's position on the HPV vaccination, I am glad that he draws a fine line in his policy about government involvement in the health sector. While he is in support of mandatory HPV shots, he is against social security. At least we know that he isn't chirping the monotone TEA Party note of deregulation and ending of government involvement.
Post a Comment