Is the Gardasil vaccine really safe? - Page 4

it is not crushing or tearing for a boy to be circumcised.They do it with a scalpel,and are done within a few mintues.

Please. That's simply untrue. Courtesy of http://intact.ca/vidintro.htm:

"...Because a baby’s prepuce is usually naturally adherent to the glans (this is similar to how our nails are adherent to the nail bed), it must first be torn away in order to perform the circumcision. The doctor applies clamps and inserts the nose of a pliers-like instrument to tear away the foreskin from the glans. Once this is done, the clamp is used to make a crush line for the dorsal slit. The dorsal slit allows the bell to be placed under the foreskin easily. After the dorsal crush has been applied for long enough to reduce the chance of bleeding, the dorsal slit is made with scissors inside the crush line. Next, the doctor puts the bell of the clamp over the glans and arranges the base plate over the foreskin. He then pulls the foreskin through the space between the bell and the base plate, making sure that the end of the dorsal slit is above the base plate. The arm of the bell is now inserted into the yoke and the nut is tightened. When the nut is tightened, the rocker arm will pivot at the notch, pulling on the arm of the bell and crushing the foreskin between the bell and the base plate. Using a scalpel the foreskin is now cut against the bell at the base plate and removed. Now there is a wait to allow the clamp assembly to crush the blood vessels to lessen the chance of bleeding. The clamp is removed. Because of the crush, the remaining skin is stuck to the bell and must be pulled away with the fingertips and gauze. The end result is that there is only shaft skin and glans left. The frenulum and all the inner mucosa including the ridged band, has been removed."

(Bolding mine.)

When I started to read this post I thought you were speaking of abortion.
That is the only thing I can see as comparable to your post.

Circumcision is Biblical, there must be a reason for that and that is good enough for me.

The nerves are not developed completely yet and although there is a moment's pain, it is over fast and much more hygenic IMO.

But it certainly is a parent's decision.

My father had to be circumcised as an adult, it is MUCH worse then.

well this is totally off topic.....but I am a FIRM believer in having boys circumcised.I have 3 boys,and ALL were done.
And again,a believer in this shot.I would have my daughter get it all over again.

umm okay what does circumsicion do exactly can you explain it??
IMO it is done simply for aesthetic reasons...because all it takes is for the guy to wash himself under the foreskin to be healthy and hygenic even uncircumsized.

My cousin chose to get the Gardasil series, and hasn't had any apparent problems from it. I chose not to because I didn't feel it was worth running an unknown risk to eliminate a nonexistent risk (I know I'm not going to turn up with an STD, because of how I live my life). I kind of resented the "one less" ad campaign, in fact, because I felt that it assumed I had no control over what happened to my body other than by getting a needle in my arm.

If I had kids (big if)...the only way I would make a daughter get Gardasil would be if I knew she was already sleeping around anyway, although if she really wanted to get it done while she was still on the family insurance, I would let her, because for all I would know at the time, she might know more about her risk factors than I did. Vaccinations for very contagious diseases like chicken pox are one thing, and I would get those done as early as possible, but not things that can be prevented more effectively by lifestyle choices. If they, when they're old enough, choose a lifestyle where the medical protection makes sense, that's their choice, not anything that's my business to manage for them.

And on the circimcision tangent, I would let a son choose that for himself when he's old enough. It can always be done later, but it's impossible to undo (I realize that certain plastic surgery does come close, but I don't think it makes sense to have something harmless removed because the person can just get something like it put back later). Of course, if there were a problem like a treatment-resistant infection, I would have no problem having that procedure done for medical reasons; I just see no reason why changing someone's body, rather than leaving it alone, should be the default option.

Whoa, Jullian - I wasn't laughing about this surgical procedure - I was trying to make a point about making decisions on behalf of someone else - i.e. your son or daughter, and trying not to sound mean while making my point.

I just heard on the news this morning that a 14 year old girl in Cavendish, England died after receiving the vaccine. Having said that, apparently England uses a different vaccine than we do in Canada and I'm not sure what the US uses. A number of girls in her class also had a bad reaction so perhaps that one batch was not good.

How awful for the parents to have to deal with having their daughter die from being vaccinated. As a survivor of cervical cancer myself, I still say I would not get the vaccine nor would I recommend it for my daughter.

Well you guys got off topic.

I know I encouraged my sister to get vaccinated & she did, no bad reaction.

I chose not to do it because I'm in a long-term-commited relationship where infidelity is not an issue (let's not get into my personal life, but it's really not a concern with us). The doctor even asked me, what about the future? If you guys divorce? I just told him I'm still quite young & I have years to change my mind and get the vaccine. I have no reason for not getting it, just that it's not really necessary.

If I had an of-age daugher she would ABSOLUTELY be getting the shot.

Let's please stay on topic about the Gardasil vaccine.

Thanks.

If I had been younger, and not already diagnosed with HPV when the vaccine came out, I would have gotten it.

But what I find fascinating about the vaccination is that it has opened up lines of communication about a STD that people either didn't know about or didn't talk about. I mean, I hadn't heard of it until I was diagnosed with it.

Btw, I still have HPV, and pap results for 4 years now are low-grade abnormal (i.e., no cancer). I WISH this vaccine had been available a few years earlier.

Thanks for all the info, links, and opinions. It did help me be able to make an educated decision in regards to this vaccine

The UK is using Cervarix rather than Gardasil. Here's the story about that poor girl:
Cancer jab alert after girl dies

I wouldn't get it at all. I hate shots and I don't like some of the side effects that have been happening to peope due to this vaccine.

I will just get screened every year like I have been for the past few years and if I happen to get cervical cancer I know they will catch it early enough to take care of it.

That is why we get pap tests done girls. If you want to be a responsible woman or mother, get screened yearly and teach your daughters that at 21 or when they become sexually active that they need to be screened yearly too. Better yet, let's teach our children to be monogamous and be that way ourselves and to (at the very least) have your partners screened before hopping into the sack.

To me, it's all about prevention. And safe sex is a much easier (and safer) means to prevent ANY STD (And cancer causing transmissions such as HPV).




It's also very sad to say that most of us have already been exposed to and/or have HPV in our systems, which would makes the vaccine useless.



Edit - I'm also interested in somebody making a separate thread for the debate on circumcision. I always did love the heated debates that arise from that topic. If there is one already made, I'd love to be directed to it so I can add my own 2 cents.

The last debate, here, on circumcision did NOT turn out well, believe me.