Discussion in 'The Watercooler' started by Sheila, Feb 6, 2009.
Just a heads up.
I'm glad I hadn't gotten it for difficult child, even though our GP wanted to. It was too new and I wasn't comfortable with something that had no long term data.
Sometimes it pays to be a cynic, eh?
We are another family that chose not to get this shot for our daughters, when the big media push to do so was huge. My husband was VERY vocal about this matter. Yea, hubby!
I see where it is for boys also. I hadn't heard about that.
I need a neutering vaccination for him that can be reverse after he's married.
N*, her pediatrician and I agreed to have her get the Gardasil vaccine. There is a long history of female reproductive problems on my mom's side of the family. Ovarian, uterine, cervical - someone somewhere along the line has dealt with problems in one of these areas, including cancer.
N* did not have any adverse reactions, other than a little soreness at the injection site, which was to be expected.
To Sheila, excuse me for a minute while I gather my composure. That just struck me a funny. But I know it really isn't.
I was aimlesslessy surfing the net one day and ended up on Erin Brockavich's web page - don't ask me how, just one of those free-association things I think. Anyway, she had a link to a gov't site that keeps track of reported adverse reactions to Gardasil (I think she's involved in litigation against the makers) and there were thousands of reactions. Some relatively minor, but some pretty doggone significant. I realize that there are risks with everything but to my mind, Gardasil is not on the same line as the polio or pertussis vaccines in terms of urgency. My girl will not be getting this version of it. Maybe someday if they make it more generally safer, or when she's old enough to make an informed decision for herself. In the meantime, I'm hammering into her safety, responsibility, and keeping the protection of her body in her hands.
Both my girls had it and were/are fine. I worry about long term effects, such as sterility. We discussed the vaccine extensively with our DR and both girls were comfortable with it, as was I.
Everything comes with a risk. It's new just like every other vaccine that has come before. Long term effects are unknown and there will always be risks, just like any other vaccine.
I think some people forget that this vaccine does not prevent cancer. It prevents the virus(es) that can lead to cancer. For my now 25 year old niece, it is too late. She caught the [HPV] virus and has already had to have her cervix twice frozen and scraped due to cancerous cells caused by the virus. Her Dr said it would be a waste of time for her to get the vaccine at this time.
With difficult child's track record, we thought it was a good idea. I advised easy child to pass, but she went for it. Neither had any side effect [thus far] other than a little soreness at the injection site.
Both my girls had it and no adverse reactions except difficult child/easy child 2 felt faint and nauseous after the 3rd shot and she said it was a painful series of shots. Here's hoping there aren't any longterm side effects that show up in 10 or 20 years...
Sheila, I like the way you think! I want that for my son, too!
(In all seriousness, it sounds like there are some significant side effects.)
I was concerned about those side effects, too. I feel fortunate that Missy's not old enough for the vaccine and that we have time to see the outcome of this. It's very unfortunate. I'm sure we will not be getting this, since Missy already has a seizure disorder.
It seems as though some of these vaccines are getting pushed through a lot sooner than they used to. Maybe I'm wrong.
Remember the Acutane for acne? My neice used it. She is not the same person. Her mom really feels that it was because of the Acutane, but it's really too late to do anything and proving her case would be too hard, at this point anyway.
The dichotomy of the drug industry is kind of damned if you do and damned if you don't. On one hand, society is demanding new treatments and new drugs NOW, yet on the other, if they push them out too soon, society damns them for the negative effects. It's irresponsible of them to hold back a drug that would potentially save or improve the life quality of someone, but it's just as irresponsible of them to push the drug out if it's unsafe.
Loth - they say that girls between 9 and 12 develop the strongest immune system response to this so they get much stronger protection than girls vaccinated later. So you can't put this off as long as you think.
We discussed it with J's gyn and decided to go ahead. She had the first shot and we scheduled the rest of the shots. I cancelled them because Jess was VERY sick after the first shot. I was quite scared. husband and I decided to NOT vaccinate her the rest of the way at this time.
I think it is a decision every family must make for each child individually. My sons will not be getting this unless it is state mandated.
i knew there would be some kinda tail surrounding this medication. a friend of mine who is a pharma regional sales manager said the makers were pushing it hard to sell it. i just wasn't feeling it. i'm so glad whomever here got it was ok.
i was going to do it with easy child than something stopped me.
kt's already had shots 1 & 2 with no adverse physical reactions. Phew/whew. Had I known or been aware I would have thought twice.
However, pediatrician doctor & the ob/gyn specialist she had called about kt felt that we ought to get the vaccine going given her vulnerabilities.
Sometimes, you feel stuck between a rock & a hard place. As I said there has been no adverse physical symptoms & kt is due in for her last vaccine next month. I'll talk it over with pediatrician doctor before we continue.
I think it is completely irresponsible for the NVIC to put out this information and for cbs news to report it without further clarification about who the NVIC is and what the FDA has to say in response.
Like every vaccination, there are adverse side effects that should be considered when making the decision on whether to get your child vaccinated with gardasil.
I haven't had difficult child take the shots. Her gp and my gynecologist are both pushing for it but I just don't trust it yet. They said the 2 yr shots were safe. 2 weeks after getting them is when difficult child started to change. I still think that is why she is a difficult child today
My two cents: Always gonna be adverse reactions. I haven't seen any decent proof other than anecdotal evidence on the Gardasil shots.....for me, it's not enough. My background is in bio/health research, and I'm not going to change my mind about something until there are more than just STORIES. I read the scientific articles, and I'm not seeing anything to worry me.
I'm not saying the news stations are necessarily wrong. I'm saying NO ONE knows at this point whether it's MORE dangerous than any other vaccine. People are "injured" by ALL the vaccines out there today. MMR, tetanus, flu--EVERY single one has ill effects for some people who take it. That's the nature of the beast---the attempt is to lower the number of injuries as much as possible, not to eliminate them, because it's just not possible. Personally, I believe we're just hearing about the Gardasil problems because of the controversy surrounding an "STD vaccine"---everyone was watching this one closely from the very beginning. I got my 3-series. No ill effects, hurt less than the tetanus shot. In fact, I had a horrible reaction to my last tetanus shot, had to go to the local minor emergency clinic. But I didn't go crying to the local TV station about it.
No easy answers. But I refused to NOT get it, and say, "I'll wait until there's more info"---because that's asking other women and girls to take the risk for me. It's a personal decision (as in, I'm not judging anyone else's choice on this one!), but I'm too stinking proud to ask others to do my dirty work.
Separate names with a comma.