Is it right for the governor of Texas order vaccine for girls?

171>Why does he believe it%26#039;s his choose to make them take anti-cancer vacination, does he know of any long term side affects does anyone???
Reply:He cannot force girls to have the vaccine, all he can do it make it available should they choose to.
Reply:This therapy is way too new to know what, if any, long-term risks are associated with its use. No, government does not have the right to dictate the use of drugs/vaccines - especially when NO ONE knows the long-term risks or benefits!
Reply:This is a double edge sword. He wants to make sure the girls in Tx are safe from getting a virus that will cause cancer and can be deadly because cerivical cancer is not easily detected. The virus is transmitted thru sexual contact. So, on the other hand, he%26#039;s saying that he knows the girls are going to mess around anyway, so he better protect them early in middle school before they start messing around.





As far as the side effects and long term effects, I%26#039;m sure the FDA has studied this to no end and feel it is safe.





I don%26#039;t believe Gov Perry should mandate it. He can make it a requirement for attending public schools, like with all the other vaccinations required. I think this one should be a personal choice.
Reply:I live in Texas it is available for the ones who want it. It is not mandatory to take the vaccination. I wish they had it sooner. My daughter is 21 when she was 18 she had cervical cancer. She had one surgery to remove part of her cervix did not get it all then the Dr had to freeze the rest of the cancer cells. I am all for anything that will help fight against cancer!!!!!!
Reply:The very nature of community health goes against the grain of individuality. The governor%26#039;s goal is to all but eliminate cervical cancer and save lives. For the public, this is great. To the individual, this seems intrusive. All I know is that Americans are no longer suffering from small pox, polio, etc. the way they were 100 years ago.
Reply:Is this not a voluntary option? That is how i understood it to be. The option is available ( where once it was not) for women to have access to the vaccine. If you decide that it is not for you then that is your choice.


The only problem I see is that if the vacine is or was avaiable to any individual who refused or abstained and later was found to have the problem. Could the authorities refuse to provide insured medical treatment to that individual?.
Reply:It is just another vaccine like all the other vaccines that school children take. I think if it will help prevent a disease like cancer, we should all welcome it. Lots of women don%26#039;t have regular screening for cervical cancer so this is one more weapon in the fight against cancer. We didn%26#039;t know the long term effects of polio, rubella, dyptheria and german measles%26#039; shots when we agreed to take them, so why would this be any different?
Reply:totally against it for myself and if i had girls. vaccines can create a whole new set of issues regarding health in the long run.