newsy links– and that’s newsy not newsie

I’m not sassy today, i’m angry. news can be so depressing…

This is why I don’t support making Gardasil a required vaccination for young girls.

How many of these heartwrenching stories do we have to read before something substantial is done about it? (and don’t tell me “but the GI bill…”)

“Super bishops?” REALLY?!

and, just for you mayhem, wall-e for president?

i’m trying to cheer myself up by reading this, listening to this, and thinking about this.

Advertisements

4 responses to “newsy links– and that’s newsy not newsie

  1. you know, i’m going to have to disagree with you on your disapproval (dislike?) of gardasil. i think that this CNN article falls into the “fear news tactic” camp. there is as yet NO proof that gardasil is not safe, nor is there a SINGLE PROVEN link between gardasil and the health complaints recorded. (the story of the girl with pancreatitis notes that there is no proven link from the vaccination and her illness.) as with ANY vaccination, there are side effects, yes. but is the nausea that *may* occur better than, say CANCER? i just wonder why this article is first off so brief and second off so short of actual, proven numbers or statistics to back the claims. if gardasil is proven to be ineffective or even dangerous, then yes, by all means, it should not be approved by the FDA. but until then, i wonder if these stories come up just to further illustrate how horrible this vaccine is so we shouldn’t give it to young girls because it will lead to promiscuity. and THAT kind of mentality is what ticks me off.

    p.s. feministe agrees with me http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2008/07/08/cnn-spreads-hpv-vaccination-doubts/
    p.p.s sidenote of potential bias: i myself have had the vaccination

  2. I can see your point. but, i have huuuuuuge problems with the people who want to require this vaccine for young girls.
    to me, it reeks of large-scale medical testing, using young women as lab rats. If you want to get the vaccine, fine. get the vaccine once you’ve conducted your own research and made an informed decision. but don’t require me, or anyone else who isn’t 100% sure yet, to fill their bodies with your untested chemicals and your 7,600 “unproven” “unlinked” medical claims.

    my potential bias is an utter hatred and distrust of pharmaceutical companies.

  3. On the whole, I’m with Mayhem on her assessment of the CNN article. I am very ambivalent on the subject of required medical treatments – on the one hand, I’m reticent to legislate anything that personal. On the other hand, I hate to see generations of women grow up at risk of cervical cancer because a large chunk of the population finds it easier to deny the reality of teenage sex than to deal with the problem honestly. Either way, though, nothing in that CNN article convinced me there was any substantiated reason to be concerned about side effects.

    They did a great study about this kind of reverse placebo effect when they released fluoride into the water supplies. They staggered the introduction of fluoride to the water supplies to various communities, and the announcement of said introduction. But the announcements did *not* correspond to when fluoride was actually added. There was a huge demonstrable uptick of medical reports complaining about complications, etc, etc … but it corresponded perfectly with the *announcement* of the addition, not with the actual chemical at all. Long story short 7,600 unsubstantiated rumors = big pile of squat.

    Furthermore, a poem: http://www.poems.com/poem.php?date=14070

  4. ok, CNN article aside, just think about this issue on the whole. While this vaccine may be the godsend it puports to be, it still may not. The longterm effects of this vaccine have not been studied! We don’t know if this vaccine will last these women’s lifetimes or if a revaccination will need to occur. We don’t know what effect this vaccine will have on women’s bodies in the coming years and we won’t know for another decade. We don’t know if the aluminum in the vaccine will prove harmful to women in the longrun- alumninum! which has been linked to breast cancer. so get rid of cervical cancer, but up your risk of breast cancer? Again, I’m not arguing that women shouldn’t ever get the vaccine. women have and women should make their own informed decisions, and parents should retain the right, for now, to decide for themselves if there children should receive this pricey and potentially hazardous vaccine.

    not only that, but cervical cancer deaths have gone down dramatically in the last few decades with the increase in education and regular pap smears. cervical cancer deaths account for 1.5% of deaths among women so why the huuuge push for this vaccine? why aren’t we focusing on the #1 killer of women in the US: heart disease, which kills 1 in 3 women every year? In 2003, almost twice as many women died of cardiovascular disease (both heart disease and stroke) than from all cancers combined. so why aren’t we spending just as much on a hip new ad campaign that sings the praises of healthy eating habits and regular exercise and of being 1 less affected by heart disease?
    it’s the sex obsession in this country that is diverting our attention from the real problems.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s