There are two reasons I did not allow my daughter to get the vaccine.

One - which you already mentioned - is that the long term effects are not proven yet. Two - the stats of protection are small - it does not prevent all types of cancer and the stats of how many women - so far - that have this type of cancer related to HPV are very small in relation to the percentage of cancers it MIGHT prevent.

I am ready to take the chance to not give my daughter the vaccine - she is 14. I HAVE taken this opportunity to continue talking to my daughter about sexually transmitted disease and how she should protect herself from getting one. We already have had many discussions about puberty, sex, boys, and every topic that comes with it, since she was age 9. So the only thing that the I see good about this vaccine is that maybe FAMILIES (not just the mothers who you seem to think the fears rely on - you have not seen my husband when my daughter has a bathiing suit on!!!) have open discussions about sexually transmitted disease and cancer.

As I understand your post, you have decided that 1) You don't know enough long term about the safety and efficacy of the vaccine:

This information is available from the CDC as well as information you could get from doing your own research on a reputable source like Medline. To deal with the questions you raised: The long term effects are not proven yet. Of course that depends on your definition of long term. You could argue we don't know the long term effects of polio vaccines as they have only been available since the 1950's and the earliest recipients are just now entering their senior years. The issue with HPV is that it is acquired typically during adolescence and early adulthood when, like it or not, people are more likely to have exposure to multiple partners each of whom is having exposure to multiple partners. The vaccine is NOT useful once the particular HPV strain is could have prevented if it had been received is acquired by the patient. It takes 3 shots over 6 months to develop useful immunity, so when your daughter decides that she is ready to initiate sex do you really believe she is then going to wait six months to be fully protected? And do you really believe that her partner will not be a person who puts her at risk of HPV? By mid-20's most people are having fewer partners and the risk of new acquisition of HPV is lower. Thus the vaccine needs to have its peak efficacy from before the initiation of sex for about 10 - 15 years. The data, which is available, is outstanding on its efficacy although it is not 15 years out yet. No, it does not protect against all cancers, only 70% of cervical cancers. Seat belts don't protect against all automobile deaths and injuries, and some people die from wearing seat belts. But the benefits overwhelmingly outweigh the known risks.

We are all pleased that you take the chance to talk to your daughter about sexual choices and responsible decision making. It probably helps postpone initiation of sex a while. But you are very unrealistic if you think that teenagers, including yours, will not take risks. Do they start drinking, tobacco, pot, skip school, etc even though they "know" better? Of course. So you shouldn't depend on your having talked about such issues to protect your daughter. Keep in mind that once the HPV strain is caught, the shot is not going to help with that strain. Yes, it would be nice if the FDA would allow vaccination of boys too as it would help break the chain of spread, but that hasn't happened and may not for quite a while as the benefits to males are much much lower. We only have one vaccine that we give to both sexes which really only helps one sex, rubella. Boys get vaccinated twice although it is a completely trivial illness in boys, but we get it to keep women from catching rubella during pregancy. A great example of very effective long term planning in vaccine strategy. Please rethink your daughter's HPV status. One more thought. I know two teenage girls, both of whom took "virginity" pledges but were date raped. Too late for preventive HPV vaccines.

"One - which you already mentioned - is that the long term effects are not proven yet. Two - the stats of protection are small - it does not prevent all types of cancer and the stats of how many women - so far - that have this type of cancer related to HPV are very small in relation to the percentage of cancers it MIGHT prevent"

Im sorry to keep following your posts. It speaks to how strongly I feel about this topic and is out of my normal character. First, you have the right to make this choice. I dont support making this mandatory. So your daughter = your call.

As to your quotes, the FDA and NIH have no qualms about the safety of this drug. Nor do any of the proffessional bodies involved in the care of these patients (ACOG, AAP, AMA). How long do you want data for before you accept safety. Another 10 years.. 30 years? The FDA is often criticized for its rigid drug approval process. In Europe, treatments are approved much quicker. As a result, patients often go overseas for treatments while we wait her for safety data. Of course, when you rush a drug through, sometimes you find out later we were doing harm. But in this case there is little biologic plausabilty to anticipate a long term negative side effect from a vaccine. I would be willing to bet you have taken or given your daughter medications with the same or worse level of patient safety as this vaccine (say over the counter flu medication?)- and for conditions much less dangerous than cancer.

Then you say the cancer protection stats are small. Again, what do you call small. Its covers 70% of cervical cancer HPV cancers. I call that "large". 70% would equal 8,000 fewer women with cervical cancer per year and 3,000 lives per year saved. On top of that, as I keep stressing over and over, reducing HPV pre-malignant lesions would prevent almost 2 million annual abnormal paps. Saving these patient LEEPs, CKCs, cryo, ect also justifies this drug from a patient and social standpoint. You throw around the word small. i guess to you the numbers 70%, 3,000 deaths, 8,000 cancers, 2million abnormal pap smears are small...

<link>

for people who desire unbiased facts from the NIH and NCI about the vaccine. I recommend this over the largely uniformed objections being raised here.

In 20 years, how do you explain to your daughter who is dying of cervical cancer that you had the opportunity to vaccinate her against this deadly disease, yet you chose not to? As a parent, shouldn't you do everything you can to protect your child? P.S. Why do you have to tell your child what she's being vaccinated against? Why not just include it in "your shots for school"? Why tell her? Just let her be vaccinated. I can't ever remember being told what I was being given injections for. And my dad's a doctor!

I have not yet decided when to give my daughter (now 12) this vaccine. If the vaccine were against ovarian cancer, which cannot be detected early, or breast cancer, which kills 41,000 US women a year (vs. 3850 for cervical cancer--and dropping) I would rush to have her vaccinated. But thanks to Pap smears, so many cervical cancers (in the U.S.) are detected early and are very treatable. Of all the things that might someday harm a U.S. child who comes from an educated family with health insurance, cervical cancer is low on the list (despite all of those "one less statistic" drug company commercials that make it seem otherwise). That's not to say the vaccine isn't beneficial. But because I don't see cervical cancer as a likely threat to my daughter (statistically speaking) I find myself weighing whether she MUST have this vaccine now versus waiting until there is more data about effectiveness/side effects, etc.

...so it's all right with you if she DOES end up dying of an easily prevented cancer? Nice. Aren't you the Mommy of the year.

Is it all right with you if she dies from whooping cough or measles, too? How about meningitis? Flu?

If you've made sure she's vaccinated against all the other nasties, then you're nothing but a hypocrite who has no problem playing with people's lives.

I Hereby Sentence You to the Rock of Presumptuous ("Fatuous" might be a better word, but I have a tradition to maintain.) Ninnies, There to be Ignored for Eternity. Here's your shovel.

If your response is directed to me--I did not say that I wouldn't vaccinate my daughter. I said that I was thinking about WHEN to do it. I'm considering waiting until the vaccine has more of a safety track record since there is a very low risk that my daughter will ever suffer from cervical cancer anyway. If I was certain that the vaccine was 100% safe I wouldn't hesitate to have her vaccinated immediately.

I come from a good family. We always had health insurance and went to good doctors. I went to a prestigious university, yet I have already had a cervical cryosurgery to remove the affected areas...Needless to say, nearly anyone can get the virus that causes cervical cancer. Unfortunately, I am too old to be vaccinated, but I would never have given it a second thought. You get the injections and you don't have to worry about most cervical cancer. Wow. This is like the greatest medical leap today. A vaccine against cancer. 100% safe? People have reactions to EVERYTHING. Please check your data and see that there are kids and adults every year who have terrible adverse reactions to just about everything out there. But this is a vaccine against CANCER. This is huge.

Now is the time. Haven't you been reading the posts? Between 9 and 12 is when the immune reaction to the vaccine provides the best protection.

The "safety" argument is pure bullshit.

You are risking your daughter's life here. Do you have the "right" to do that?

jerseygirl300:

But thanks to Pap smears, so many cervical cancers (in the U.S.) are detected early and are very treatable. Of all the things that might someday harm a U.S. child who comes from an educated family with health insurance, cervical cancer is low on the list

Since people who are middle class never lose their jobs, their finances or their health insurance, you must be correct. You can afford it now, but what will your daughter be able to afford at 24 when she has graduated and is no longer on your insurance? I agree there are things that have a greater probability of occuring, but it seems extremely stupid not to prevent something because, "I'm a middle class person who has insurance so bad things can't happen."

As usual, PhysicsGirl brings some common sense to the table.

If one follows the type of fallacious reasoning given above, you might argue that there is no point in ever doing anything. No action that a person can take has a 100% chance of succeeding. By the time "long term effects" are proven, your daughter would have already have contacted the disease.

If you want to roll the dice with your child's life, that is clearly a choice that can be made. But don't try to argue that it is a choice that should be made.

ldtaylor:

I am ready to take the chance to not give my daughter the vaccine - she is 14. I HAVE taken this opportunity to continue talking to my daughter about sexually transmitted disease and how she should protect herself from getting one. We already have had many discussions about puberty, sex, boys, and every topic that comes with it, since she was age 9. So the only thing that the I see good about this vaccine is that maybe FAMILIES (not just the mothers who you seem to think the fears rely on - you have not seen my husband when my daughter has a bathiing suit on!!!) have open discussions about sexually transmitted disease and cancer.

You do realize that condoms do not protect against HPV, correct? HPV can even be spread through "petting." HPV is a case where talking about STD prevention is not the only step you need to take.

Also, it HAS been proven that the vaccine reduces the number of abnormal pap tests. This in and of itself should be a reason to get the vaccine. I had an abnormal test last year-which the doctor now thinks was a lab error- and getting a inner cervical biopsy was traumatizing. It was extremely painful, and I had the fear that I could have cancer for several months while waiting for the appointment and the subsequent results.

jerseygirl...

I would like to say that I applaud you for your caution. While others may slam you and your parenting skills with reckless abandon (very civil of the poster I might add), I am in the same situation. My stepdaughter is 11 and my mother and I the other day were discussing this very topic. I do not pretend to be an expert about this subject, but there are so many strains of HPV and the long-term research about the efficacy of this drug has not been published. What if when my daughter is 25 it is discovered she has a health problem possibly linked to this vaccine? Great, she's been protected from 4 strains of HPV...

Am I a worthless mother then because I gave it to her because of societal pressure and wonderfully flashy commercials telling me I can make her "one less?"

You can't have it both ways. Either you are "not an expert" and you trust the advice of experts. Or, you do view yourself as a person who has enough information to make an informed decision to disagree with doctors.

You can't play both the "I'm not sure" and the "I disagree" card in the same argument.