Read other letters about this article

• Thursday, April 5, 2007 01:08 PM

  To his credit? It's to his credit he is going to veto this stupid bill

  Associated Press: New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson has made an about face -- he now says he will veto the state bill that would have required that all sixth grade girls receive an HPV vaccination. He'd previously said that he would sign the bill, but ultimately decided it was premature. "While everyone recognizes the benefits of this vaccine, there is insufficient time to educate parents, schools and health care providers," Richardson said. To his credit, he has already signed a bill requiring that health insurance companies cover the vaccine for girls.

  Why doesn't Salon do some real investigative reporting.

  Why was Gardasil fasttracked? Was it because it really was the best drug available, or did it have to do with Merck's lobbying and fear of competition.

  Who wrote the bill? In other states, it was Merck that wrote the bill.

  Why doesn't Salon do some real investigative reporting.

  Were there flaws in the tests? It's been reported that the "control" was contaminated with elements from the experimental drug. This would artificially bring the numbers of problems associated only with the drug.

  Who was tested? Is it true that almost no one in the targeted age group was tested?

  How was it tested? Is it true there were no long term longitudinal studies of the drug used to detect long term problems caused by the drug?

  What were the results? Is it true that the test did not prove conclusive in the targeted age group, but conclusions had to be inferred from older age groups?

  How does it compare? Is it true that Gardasil would be the most expensive mandatory vaccine? (If not the most expensive vaccine?)

  What are the other uses of the money? Is it true that women that get Gardasil still need an annual pap smear? Is it true that with annual pap smears, most of the occurrences of cervical cancer are detectable at an early state to make them much more treatable? What has been happening to the rates of cervical cancer of the years? Would a better use of the money be to buy Gardasil, or to make low cost annual women's health clinics available to all populations?

  When will the target age group get cervical cancer? Is it true that the targed age group is 10 year old girls that will probably not get cervical cancer for 25-40 years?

  What will happen to medicine and cervical cancer in the next 25-40 years? Will this vaccine be obsoleted by new treatments in the 25-40 years these girls will have before they come down with cervical cancer?

  Who is really upset? Is it religious nutjobs that don't want to think of their children having sex? Or it is Doctors AND Parents that are upset with their children being used as as guinea pigs to test a drug that was poorly tested with contaminated controls promoted by lobbyists for a disease that will not effect these girls for 25 years when medical advances probably will obsolete this vaccine and that this vaccine will not eliminate the best current treatment for this disease which is an annual pap smear?

  Could these people be upset because it is a danger to their children? An infringement of the parent/child relationship? A massive taxpayer giveaway to Merck?

  Or are we all religious nutjobs that hate our daughters as Amanda Marcotte would have you dictate?

  I expect intelligence from Salon. I expect not to see knee-jerk feminism or knee-jerk liberalism.

  —ガガ ガガ ガガ Read ガガ ガガ ガガ's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel