Mandating hpv vaccination arguments Adult phone chat cell phones
Gardasil - the vaccine that protects women and men against four types of Human papillomavirus (HPV) that together cause 75% of cervical cancer cases and 90% of genital warts cases - has been making headlines recently.Historically, vaccines have innately been controversial. Debate abounds as to whether vaccines are a matter of individual choice, parental choice, or state rights.Indeed when defending his 2007 decision, Governor Perry had to phrase his backing of the vaccine as a “pro-life” attempt to protect women’s health.In the September 7th Republican debate, however, when challenged on this very decision, Perry returned to defending his mandate, saying he acted to protect girls against cancer.While all of these present plausible reasons why the vaccine is not gaining widespread popular support, I believe that America’s highly partisan political environment and the upcoming Republican primary are reshaping the HPV vaccine debate.
And yet, people are strongly opposed to Gardasil - a vaccine that helps protect against four types of HPV. In an insightful op-ed in the Huffington Post, Jeffrey Levi - Executive Director of Trust for America's Health, lays out possible reasons for why HPV vaccination rates are so low: the high cost of the vaccine (Gardasil is not covered by all insurance policies), lack of education about the vaccine, and racial, ethnic and poverty disparities for HPV vaccination completion.
In the end, the debate behind the HPV vaccine needs to change.
Gardasil is neither a tool of government control nor a mandate that should be enforced upon citizens; Gardasil is a smart choice for both men and women to protect against a sexually transmitted infection.
According to the CDC, about 17,500 women and 9,300 men are affected by cancers caused by HPV each year.
Cervical cancer (women) and oropharyngeal cancer (men) are the most common among them.