Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is dedicated to those who are facing the challenge of raising children without the support of a spouse. This is a place to share ideas and lend mutual support.

Saint Rita is known to be a patroness for abused wives and mourning women.
Learn More: Saint Rita

Feb 5th 2013 new

After reading everyone's responses, a few thoughts come to mind:

I agree that it's wise for all women to get vaccinated since they may get the virus from their husband and so end up infected even if they never had a sexual relationship with another guy. Even for women though, there should be no reason to get this vaccine as a child/teenager unless she is planning on having sex.

But for guys? A guy who is not planning on having sex doesn't need the vaccine. A guy who is planning on it should be old enough to give both his own concent to the doctor and an answer to God. I understand that his decision to have pre-marital sex won't be dependent on having received the vaccine, but I question why one is needed? Clearly the purpose of vaccinating a minor, before he is old enough to make his own decisions, is because you know that realistically, despite our teaching to the contrary, most young guys will have sex. So we want to protect their bodies (or in this case those of their future wives) even though we can't always protect their soul from mortal sin.

Let's suppose that the Pill was totally safe with no side effects. Would you put your daughter on the pill "just in case"? You teach her not to have pre-marital sex, but at the same time we are keeping our head out of the sand and know that realistically, given the statistics, the chances of her having sex are high. Would you put her on this safe pill to ensure that if she does happen to have sex, at least she won't get pregnant?

Feb 5th 2013 new

Lisa, I think you should do more research on HPV and it's relation to throat cancers. I think the health issue is more broad than just what has been discussed here. As you inferred, it might be best for him to make the choice on his own when he is older. By then, maybe even more research will be available. Good luck.

Feb 5th 2013 new

Lisa,

I didn't have to face this one with my kiddos, they were all older when the vaccine became available. I think I would have had them get it however. HPV is responsible for up to 98% of cervical cancers and they have finally finally come out and stated that it is a cancer as a direct result of sexual transmission in the majority of cases. It is also silent, even for boys. It is also linked to penile cancers as well. I have seen reports on both sides of the issue. The one thing I can say for certain is that the HPV vaccine is not in my opinion a license to have sex. I think the birth control pill on the other hand can be. I worry about this as well as an educator who has been responsible for sex education, that everyone is concerned with pregnancy and the real worries to me should be the sexually transmitted diseases some which are lethal or incurable. Some children will maneuver life well and maintain their virginity, some will not, some will have the choice taken from them through a variety of situations.

If you choose not to have your son vaccinated I would do so based on other considerations, rather than on the fact that this vaccine specifically targets some of the HPV strains that cause cervical cancer, which are sexually transmitted. I would base it on a thorough reading of peer reviewed articles on the topic and study results as have been noted by some of the other posters. And, it is true that long term consequences of the vaccine are not well known, but that is not unusual clinical trials are for limited time periods and hopefully catch the most immediate and severe consequences but cannot due to their duration capture every potential issue, not to mention there are many many factors that cannot be accounted for in a clinical trial. While this purely anecdotal, none of my friends' children who have had the vaccine have suffered any ill from it to date. And, if we want to get technical, we already vaccinate for Hep A and Hep B, both of which can be transmitted via intimate contact.

Feb 5th 2013 new

(Quote) Lauren-927923 said: And, if we want to get technical, we already vaccinate for Hep A and Hep B, both of which can be...
(Quote) Lauren-927923 said:

And, if we want to get technical, we already vaccinate for Hep A and Hep B, both of which can be transmitted via intimate contact.

--hide--

'can' is the operative word. Hep-A transmission is primarily via fecal-oral routes; transmission via sexual contact is relatively rare. While sexual transmission of Hep-B is more common than Hep-A, it can also be transmitted by contact with contaminated blood. Since the virus can remain active for extended periods (weeks) even in dried blood, this is a significant risk.

That being said, I see no reason for routine vaccination of young children for either. Hep-A is generally not a chronic of life-threatening disease, in fact many infections are sub-acute. Generally young children aren't at risk for contact with blood products (Hep_B), though vaccination may be warranted for those who live with someone infected with Hep-B.

Feb 5th 2013 new

(Quote) Paul-866591 said: Of course Jerry. One of BC's major industries is lumbering. Of course, they are all tree hugge...
(Quote) Paul-866591 said:

Of course Jerry. One of BC's major industries is lumbering. Of course, they are all tree huggers.

Excuse me while I go off to the side and remove my tounge from being stick firmly in my cheek

--hide--

Ooops! Silly me!! :dopeslap:

Feb 5th 2013 new

(Quote) Ray-914631 said: (author's comments prefixed with ">>>")
(Quote) Ray-914631 said:

(author's comments prefixed with ">>>")

--hide--

>>> Every single FDA approved vaccine type (over the last 20 years) has had far less adverse effects than the incidence of serious adverse effects seen with antibiotic use. This also applies to the Herpes vacicine.

Rates of adverse effects are less important than the morbidity/mortality of those adverse effects. Further comparing antibiotics, used to treat an existing condition, with vaccines is comparing apples and oranges: a higher risk profile is acceptable when treating serious illnesses than when vaccinating against something you might get.

>>> There are more than 20 million people in USA infected with HSV. 7 percent of those infected have had one sex partner in their lifetime.

7% is not that significant: Put another way, 93% have had multiple sex partners. The 7% should know they are at elevated risk due to their one partner having had multiple partners.

>>> Vaccine effectiveness follow the concept of herd immunity which proposes that, in contagious diseases that are transmitted from individual to individual, chains of infection are likely to be disrupted when large numbers of a population are immune or less susceptible to the disease. This is why people that dont get flu vaccine place others in the herd at risk.

Not an issue if people aren't violating the 6th commandment and choose partners that don't.

I'd be interested in your impressions of the claims in the UBC paper (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov ). All I have seen is the abstract, which raises some serious questions. Whether they back them up, I don't know...

Feb 5th 2013 new

(Quote) Jerry-74383 said: 'can' is the operative word. Hep-A transmission is primarily via fecal-oral route...
(Quote) Jerry-74383 said:

'can' is the operative word. Hep-A transmission is primarily via fecal-oral routes; transmission via sexual contact is relatively rare. While sexual transmission of Hep-B is more common than Hep-A, it can also be transmitted by contact with contaminated blood. Since the virus can remain active for extended periods (weeks) even in dried blood, this is a significant risk.

That being said, I see no reason for routine vaccination of young children for either. Hep-A is generally not a chronic of life-threatening disease, in fact many infections are sub-acute. Generally young children aren't at risk for contact with blood products (Hep_B), though vaccination may be warranted for those who live with someone infected with Hep-B.

--hide--

And, yet both are now, at least in Oklahoma, required vaccinations for children in school. Hepatitis infections/exposure are more common than people think according to some new data. I received both as an adult working in the medical field. My children received them as they were at the right age. The one my kiddos didn't get was the chicken pox vaccine, because poor little guys had already had them. My son who is in the marine corps, jokes that he's had every vaccine known to man and they find more every time they get deployed.

I have a friend I grew up with who is rabidly against vaccination, but most of her information has been gleaned from dubious sources and is tangled up with fear mongering and conspiracy ideology. Ultimately, its a parental decision that requires prayer and research from legitimate sources, so that the decision is both well informed and well discerned.

Feb 5th 2013 new

(Quote) Jerry-74383 said: The problem is, according to the abstract of the article Chelsea posted (from the Univers...
(Quote) Jerry-74383 said:

The problem is, according to the abstract of the article Chelsea posted (from the University of British Columbia medical school) there is apparently no valid evidence that the vaccine DOES prevent cervical cancer. However, there is "accumulating evidence from vaccine safety surveillance databases and case reports which continue to link HPV vaccination to serious adverse outcomes (including death and permanent disabilities)"

--hide--



I guess Jerry the benefits outweigh the risks here IMO. It is a safety factor for young men and woman and if it helps prevent cervical cancer, that would be a hugh benefit. All vaccines come with benefits and risks! Heck, any medicine you take has possible side effects and can cause even death, even Tylenol. It all depends on how ones body reacts, other illnesses or diseases, frailty, immune system, etc. I guess it is up to everyone to decide.

Feb 5th 2013 new
The reason for giving a vaccine for "female cancers" to a male is that almost universally women contract HPV from asymptomatic male carriers. If you can decrease the asymptomatic carriage rate among males you thereby decrease the epidemiologic transmission to women overall. Not to mention that HPV causes genital warts and an increased incidence of penile cancer in males.
Feb 5th 2013 new
You should check out my post on page one.
Posts 31 - 40 of 166