HPV/Gardasil vaccine?

[mom2binsd]

Yes yes yes. Want to know what college kids are doing and talking about doing just download the yik yak app and select a college campus from the drop down list. Prepare to be disgusted. It's all about getting laid as often as possible with as few strings attached. And that's easily facilitated by Tinder.

It's not just college kids, middle and high schoolers are engaging in all kinds of things, thanks in part due to the advent of snapchat etc....and the notion that so many have that sex, especially oral sex isn't that big of a deal...I have friends who have gone through this stage as well as teacher friends who have told me lots of eye opening things, so just because you think you have a kid that won't engage in any risky behavior, don't count on it....with an 11 year old DD who is in middle school I'm petrified of what she might do at a party, at a friends or wherever....I can teach her right from wrong till I'm blue in the face but sometimes you can't predict what they'll do. At least college kids and older teens seem to be a little better at condom use, but usually it's only those in serious relationships, the others feel invincible!

[egoldber]

And sometimes it is not their choice.

Exactly. My older DD was in a situation last year where she was manipulated (emotionally, not physically) into some mild contact in the bathroom at her MS. Frankly, it terrified me, and made me realize that you really have NO idea what can be happening, even at school.

[megs4413]

I'm going to let DC help make this choice for themselves between the ages of 13 and 15. So I will be declining it until that age. It's kind of a "their body, their opinion counts" thing for me with this particular vaccine. I'd also like to foster a feeling of empowerment, information, and education when it comes to their sexual health and want this to fit into that goal. me just vaccinating them without their full informed consent at 10-12 yo doesn't really seem to fit what I'm going for. This is definitely a tough choice for parents.

[marymoo86]

An FDA report on a 2011 study on the safety of injected aluminum: http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVac.../ucm284520.htm

Dr. Sears is misrepresenting the facts. He does not present any research of his own, and as far as I can tell does not actually carry out medical research. Looking at his writing on aluminum in vaccinations, I see him summarizing other research studies which looked at a completely different phenomenon (namely aluminum in intravenous feeding solutions) and making the leap to say that this can be directly translated to vaccinations (i.e. intramuscular injections). It's important to realize that intramuscular injections, intravenous administration, and oral consumption are all going to be handled different in the body, and it's inappropriate to assume that one translates directly to the other.

Here's a very clear walk-through of some of the problems with using Dr. Sears as a resource for vaccination information. http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/...r-of-dr-sears/ There is a good explanation of the differences between how bodies process aluminum-containing intramuscular injections and intravenous aluminum-containing solutions.

The FDA study doesn't include any research on long term affects of injecting aluminum adjuvants into infants. Sure some many not be harmed but there are others that would be susceptible. The issue is that you don't know if you are protecting your child from a disease or sentencing them to a lifelong sentence from a known neurotoxin. This "study" is purely a review and makes connections based on assumed toxic loads. There is no control to understand what affects injecting aluminum versus not. Without having a copy of the actual study rather than this synopsis it is hard to discuss but a cursory review elicits these questions:
*appears the "study" conflates dietary absorption versus intramuscular or subcutaneous injection
*odd it has different findings that these studies on aluminum and it has been shown to cross the blood brain barrier (just a few but there is more).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1795349
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...61813X10000975
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1795349

Your sciencebasedmedicine link - the most compelling piece is this: He does correctly state that there is very little known about the pharmacokinetics of intramuscularly injected aluminum as it occurs in vaccine adjuvants,. No Dr. Sears isn't a researcher but is smart enough to see that there are issues that need further investigating.

I wish we could sticky your post. How many people avoid vaxing due to nonsense, without fully appreciating the full consequences of their actions? Put another way, reading Sears and articles cited before your post seem to ESTABLISH that aluminum is so harmful when injected. Your articles dispute that premise. As to timing of the vax, I suspect that most kids will have at least some sexual contact at 14, so waiting to vax much later than that potentially negates the benefits of the vax.

There's a term called "confirmation bias" - seems applicable here. The articles certain dispute but applying a critical thinking hat here it is easy to pick apart the failings associated. Long term safety of adjuvants have not been established nor even studied. As stated earlier, for some it may not be an issue but there are people that are affected by this and you just summarily dismiss this. I guess collateral damage is fine for the greater good. No need to study and determine what genetics may make kids susceptible and heaven forbid translate that into safer vaccines.

[rin]

No Dr. Sears isn't a researcher but is smart enough to see that there are issues that need further investigating.

This is the scientific process in a nutshell; people identify areas that need further investigation, do some research, and then base their subsequent actions on the results of that research. Rinse-lather-repeat. Vaccine research is ongoing.

The part that is confusing to me is why so many people do not pay attention to the results of research. There have been enormous numbers of research studies looking into vaccine safety/effects; the science-backed recommendation for people without certain risk factors is overwhelmingly in support of vaccination on the standard schedule (which is produced through collaboration between some of the most knowledgeable people in the world on the subject of vaccination.)

We will never know everything on any topic; there will always be things we don't know (whether it's the possible effects of a vaccine, or of driving to the grocery store at rush hour, or how the Ceasar salad is at a particular restaurant). That shouldn't stop us from making the most informed decisions we can based on the information we do have.

Dr. Sears is one person; he does not appear to carry out research on vaccinations, and to my knowledge has not published a single medical research paper on the effects of following his alternative schedule. Frankly, following the advice of one person without any area-specific medical credentials or supporting research evidence is far scarier to me than following the advice of multiple panels of people who have trained in a field and carry out research on the topic on an ongoing basis.