Slashdot Mirror


Merck To Halt Lobbying For Vaccine

theodp writes "Reacting to a furor from some parents, advocacy groups, and public health experts, Merck said yesterday that it would stop lobbying state legislatures to require the use of its new cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil, which acts against strains of the sexually-transmitted human papilloma virus. The $400, 3-shot regimen was approved by the FDA in June. Later that month, a federal advisory panel recommended that females 11-26 years old be vaccinated. The governor of Texas has already signed an executive order making its use mandatory for schoolgirls."

12 of 544 comments (clear)

  1. Wrong Info on Blog by WebHostingGuy · · Score: 5, Informative

    And the information on the 10 things you might know is wrong.

    1. The blog states the vaccine only decreases the chance--that's wrong. If you have not been previously infected with HPV then there is a 100% effective rate.

    2. In 2007 the incidence of cervical cancer went up.

    3. Yep, it is the most expensive, however it is the ONLY vaccine which prevent cancer and DEATH. (And yeah it made $70 million, chump change for a company which made $22 billion in 2006).

    4. Wrong. Gardasil is already a part of this program. Having a mandate will not change liability at all.

    5. There is 5 year data now with another 3 1/2 year data prior to the launch of the drug; that's 8 1/2 years of data now.

    6. This is true, however, in the current data there has been no wane in the immunity; and vaccines typically never need booster shots due to the way vaccines work.

    7. Yes, neither was any other drug on the market.

    8. Pure speculation. There has been no proof that aluminum is harmful. Gardasil was tested with Hepatitis B because it has the same aluminum compound and has been on the market for 19 years.

    9. There are currently studies going on with boys and safety data is already available for boys in the label. Also, the EU and Australia are already using on boys.

    10. It's ironic that the blog ends with making an uninformed decision when all the facts are wrong on the site.

    Yeah, this seems like a shrill for Gardasil but I have personal knowledge of this drug and sometimes setting the facts straight on a drug which is saving lives need some truth out there among the free range blogs which aren't providing accurate information.

    --
    Quality Hosting e3 Servers
  2. Re:Not the government's responsibility by MysticOne · · Score: 2, Informative

    However, with the price of the vaccine, if it's not made mandatory (and it's not even REALLY mandatory, since parents can still opt out of having their daughters vaccinated), the chance that everyone who wants it will be able to be vaccinated is not likely. Since it prevents the spread of a communicable disease that has the potential to cause a variety of cancers (namely cervical, though these particular strains do play a part in some other cancers), it's within the public's interest to have this vaccine available at a reasonable price for everyone.

  3. Re:Naming by Jhon · · Score: 2, Informative

    Your numbers are off... about 70% of cancer can be traced back to HPV... generally to an exposure that occurred 10 years prior to the cancer dx -- or longer. It can also be easily IDd with paps (preferably liquid based) -- and even considering their error rate, when done annually or bi-annually, it's quite effective.

    And a hell of a lot cheaper than $400 x 2 million woman/children every year a mandatory vaccination would call for.

    Further, of the HPV strains which are linked to cancer (there's about a dozen or so), the two vaccines only block 2 and 3 respective.

  4. Re:Not the government's responsibility by Fwonkas · · Score: 4, Informative

    More to the point, I'm not sure people realize just how easy it is to contract HPV. Not only that, but there really aren't any tests for males. It usually shows no symptoms, though I think that certain types result in genital warts.

    Sex isn't even necessary to contract it. A large chunk of the adult population has it and doesn't know it. I could have it, for all I know. But it causes cervical cancer.

    --
    COMPUTER! Whatever happened to Blueberry Muffin?
  5. Re:Gimme a break by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Informative

    Without any law, concerned parents already have the means to give this shot to their daughters (just ask your doctor). So why make it a legal issue?
    Merck (and the various Federal Agencies that deal with health issues) hve done studies which conclude that if you don't require it by law, you won't get high enough vaccination rates. That conclusion is old news in public health circles and applies to all the *mandatory vaccinnes

    You can't really eradicate a disease through a program of voluntary vaccination.

    *As an aside, you may have heard that this vaccine will be voluntary, blah blah blah. That's because the Federal Law has an exemption such that your child does not have to be vaccinated against anything to attend school, as long as you claim it goes against your religious (defined as moral or ethical) beliefs. Legally, you don't have to go into any further details to get an exemption. Just put it in writing & send it to the school.
    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  6. Re:A little perspective first by Jhon · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ok... I got it. You don't know what you are talking about.

    A little background for your benefit:

    There are about 100 types of HPV. About a dozen-twenty are linked to about 80% of cervical cancers. The vaccine in question (Gardasil) offers resistance to 4 of them which account for the (around 90%) of HPV linked cancers. That still leaves a HUGE number of HPV strains for which there is no vaccine that have been linked to cervical cancer. That also leaves non-hpv linked cervical cancer.

    You're statement that "only those few types of HPV cause cervical cancer" is untrue. There are many. It would, however, be true to say that most hpv-linked cancers are casued by 4 different strains of HPV.

  7. Re:Vaccination based on assumption by shawb · · Score: 3, Informative

    This isn't assuming that people will have sex as teenagers. This is assuming that the majority of people will eventually have sex. Getting vaccinated early catches those who do have sex early. And you don't even have to assume that teenagers will have sex... studies have shown that the majority of people have lost their virginity by the time they are 18. It's a statistic, not an assumption.

    --
    I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
  8. Re:Vaccine Safety? by $uperjay · · Score: 2, Informative

    The studies that suggested measles-mumps-rubella vaccination caused autism were widely discredited.

    Seriously? 'Considering the track records of previous vaccines?' Does the word polio mean anything to you? The track records of previous vaccines suggest that they've saved millions of lives, Cynical Jim.

  9. also prevents 90% of genital warts cases by rsalvo1975 · · Score: 3, Informative
    I haven't seen it mentioned yet in this thread, but I think it's important to note that in addition to giving near 100% protection against 2 strains of HPV responsible for ~75% of all cervical cancers, this vaccine also gives near 100% protection for 2 additional strains of HPV responsible for approximately 90% of all cases of genital warts. So there's a reason for guys to get vaccinated too, although if you're a guy in the US, good luck finding someplace willing to vaccinate you.

    A few more interesting tidbits:

    -- At least 80% of women will have been infected by at least one strain of genital HPV by the time they reach 50 years of age.

    -- Condoms are only about 70% effective at preventing HPV transmission

    -- In 2007, approximately 11,150 cases of invasive cervical cancer will be diagnosed in the United States, and about 3,670 women will die from the disease. For comparison, seatbelts saved 13,274 lives in 2001 in the US.

    -- Somewhere near 10% of people have had visible genital warts. These people may still be able to transmit the virus after the warts are gone.

    -- HPV can be transmitted from a mother to baby during birth, so it is even possible to get HPV from a virgin.

    -- The HPV vaccine does not contain thimerosal/mercury.

  10. Re:What do they think? by adamofdoom · · Score: 1, Informative
    Ok so I posted most of this a bit earlier but it got buried and it applies equally well here:
    I don't normally post here, but I'm sick of hearing reactionary arguments like this. While cervical cancer is devastating and I fully support making this vaccine available on the market, I for one would most certainly not have my daughter vaccinated until it has been in WIDE SPREAD USE for at least 5 or more years, and I FERVENTLY opposed making it mandatory because of the lobbying of a drug company.

    The thing about drug companies is that they're a necessary evil: yes, they're in it for profit, but the products that they make a profit on save lives. Given that the company is Merck, infamous for selling medical technologies that they KNOW aren't safe (See Vioxx and Fosamax) all the while suppressing negative evidence against them, I don't think the benefit of a doubt you are giving them really applies here. In fact I may even wait longer just given who the company is.

    So while some of you are happy to line your daughters up as consumer testers stage 1, I think I'm going to show a bit more caution and reserve with my most important and irreplaceable things.

    Oh, and for the record I'm not particularly religious and I'm very much a political liberal - so yeah, the Christian wingnut thing most certainly doesn't apply.
  11. Re:Whose side are you on? by Jhon · · Score: 2, Informative

    I would like to know where you get your numbers...
    I work with this stuff. I'm quite familiar with it. Further, I've been a contributor to a number of research papers following HPV, CIN I-III, etc... I'm also taking part in a study gathering data on post vaccinated women.

    but the fact that this vaccine covers the four serotypes that most commonly cause cervical cancer (90%)
    Actually, thats about 70%, not 90%. It covers 90% of HPV LINKED cancer.

    HPV is the most common STD.
    Actually, it's Chlamydia Trachomatis thats most common.

    There are 15 serotypes that cause cancer (HPV 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 68, 73, and 82).
    Actually, the word is "LINKED" to cancer. There is nothing that states they CAUSE cancer. Further, the typical HIGH-RISK HPV genotypes are 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59 and 68. These are typically tested for using a high-risk hpv probe -- often using the same material from the pap (if liquid based). Further, there are a number of low-risk HPV genotypes that are checked for: 6, 11, 42, 43, 44. Gardasil blocks (6, 11, 16, & 18). Two low risk and two high risk.

    HOWEVER, the greatest reason why this vaccine needs good US marketing is because of places like Africa, where cervical cancer is one of the biggest killers of women due to lack of adequate preventitive medicine.
    Great. Get the nations of africa to make vaccination manditory. Forcing the US to vaccinate on something which will most likely be unnecessary is virtually all women in an effort to help africa is crazy. Let them pay for it. The topic is forced vaccination in the US, not africa, so my argument stands.
  12. Re:Rationality expired a while ago. by ptbarnett · · Score: 2, Informative
    I think it's GREAT that this vaccine is available, but it should NOT be mandatory.

    Despite the inflammatory name on the link to the blog article, it isn't mandatory. Even the article contradicts itself in the first paragraph:

    On Saturday, February 3, Texas Governor Rick Perry signed an executive order to make the newly-released human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine Gardasil mandatory for all young girls before entry into the sixth grade. Starting in the 2008-2009 school year, the new bill would allow parents to opt out of the vaccination if they provide documentation of religious or philosophical opposition.

    The ability to opt-out is already in Texas law, and reportedly applies to all vaccinations. When Perry announced his executive order, he added that the HPV vaccination was voluntary.

    Note that I'm not defending or promoting either side of this issue. I'm just pointing out that there's a lot of misinformation being hurled around, in an attempt to influence opinions.