Perry - Merck Connections

[Nbadan]

Thanks a lot to the ~37% of texans who voted for this assclown...


Noteworthy are the ties that bind the Governor to Merck and to Women in Government, the group that Merck paid to lobby for this mind-boggling order. The Associated Press reports that one of Merck's three lobbyists in Texas is Mike Toomey, Perry's former chief of staff. His current chief of staff's mother-in-law, Texas Republican state Rep. Dianne White Delisi, is a state director for Women in Government. The governor also received $6,000 from Merck's political action committee during his re-election campaign.

Also noteworthy is that under then governor George W. Bush, TMAP, the pharmaceutical manufacturers' cash cow to mega-billion dollar cash transference from the public purse to Big Pharma, was launched. TMAP (Texas mediction algorithm project) is the vehicle that catapulted psychotropic drugs--in particular patent protected antidepressants and antipsychotics--to blockbuster status despite lack of scientific evidence that the drugs work to improve mental health, and despite evidence that these drugs wreak havoc on both the mental and physical health of consumers.

AHRP Blogspot (http://ahrp.blogspot.com/2007/02/merck-payola-pays-off-texas-governor.html)

That's right, pretty soon the State and their lobbyist may also decide which kids and adults get psychotropic drugs

[Nbadan]

The Facts On Merck's Gardasil Vaccine

(used with permission)

I've been watching all these ads on TV telling women to find out about GARDASIL. And then I read that Merck was lobbying for this vaccine to become mandatory. Then I saw that the Texas governor is making this vaccine mandatory in Texas for preteens. So I finally decided to look into it.

Here's the scoop:


1) GARDASIL is a vaccine for 4 strains of the human papillomavirus (HPV), two strains that are strongly associated (and probably cause) genital warts and two strains that are typically associated (and may cause) cervical cancer. About 90% of people with genital warts show exposure to one of the two HPV strains strongly suspected to cause genital warts. About 70% of women with cervical cancer show exposure to one of the other two HPV strains that the vaccine is designed to confer resistance to.

2) HPV is a sexually communicable (not an infectious) virus. When you consider all strains of HPV, over 70% of sexually active males and females have been exposed. A condom helps a lot (70% less likely to get it), but has not been shown to stop transmission in all cases (only one study of 82 college girls who self-reported about condom use has been done). For the vast majority of women, exposure to HPV strains (even the four "bad ones" protected for in GARDASIL) results in no known health complications of any kind.

3) Cervical cancer is not a deadly nor prevalent cancer in the US or any other first world nation. Cervical cancer rates have declined sharply over the last 30 years and are still declining. Cervical cancer accounts for less than 1% of of all female cancer cases and deaths in the US. Cervical cancer is typically very treatable and the prognosis for a healthy outcome is good. The typical exceptions to this case are old women, women who are already unhealthy and women who don't get pap smears until after the cancer has existed for many years.

4) Merck's clinical studies for GARDASIL were problematic in several ways. Only 20,541 women were used (half got the "placebo") and their health was followed up for only four years at maximum and typically 1-3 years only. More critically, only 1,121 of these subjects were less than 16. The younger subjects were only followed up for a maximum of 18 months. Furthermore, less than 10% of these subjects received true placebo injections. The others were given injections containing an aluminum salt adjuvant (vaccine enhancer) that is also a component of GARDASIL. This is scientifically preposterous, especially when you consider that similar alum adjuvants are suspected to be responsible for Gulf War disease and other possible vaccination related complications.

5) Both the "placebo" groups and the vaccination groups reported a myriad of short term and medium term health problems over the course of their evaluations. The majority of both groups reported minor health complications near the injection site or near the time of the injection. Among the vaccination group, reports of such complications were slightly higher. The small sample that was given a real placebo reported far fewer complications -- as in less than half. Furthermore, most if not all longer term complications were written off as not being potentially vaccine caused for all subjects.

6) Because the pool of subjects were so small and the rates of cervical cancer are so low, NOT A SINGLE CONTROL SUBJECT ACTUALLY CONTRACTED CERVICAL CANCER IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM -- MUCH LESS DIED OF IT. Instead, this vaccine's supposed efficacy is based on the fact that the vaccinated group ended up with far fewer cases (5 vs. about 200) of genital warts and "precancerous lesions" (dysplasias) than the alum injected "control" subjects.

7) Because the tests included just four years of follow up at most, the long term effects and efficacy of this vaccine are completely unknown for anyone. All but the shortest term effects are completely unknown for little girls. Considering the tiny size of youngster study, the data about the shortest terms side effects for girls are also dubious.

8) GARDASIL is the most expensive vaccine ever marketed. It requires three vaccinations at $120 a pop for a total price tag of $360. It is expected to be Merck's biggest cash cow of this and the next decade.

These are simply the facts of the situation as presented by Merck and the FDA. This vaccine was just approved in June, 2006. It was never tested on pre-teens except in a tiny trial run with at most 18 months of follow up. Even if we subscribe to the theory that HPV causes cervical cancer, there is ZERO hard data showing that this vaccine reduces cervical cancer rates or cervical cancer mortality rates, which are both already very low in the US and getting lower every year. Now Texas has already made this vaccine mandatory for middle school with all sorts of useful idiots and Big Pharma operatives clamoring for more states to make this vaccine COMPULSORY immediately.

Has everyone gotten the picture or should I continue?

[Nbadan]

More from the NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/18/health/18essa.html?ex=1170565200&en=1f6151feef9875d6&ei=5070)...


Let’s think carefully before requiring young girls to get this vaccine, which protects against a sexually transmitted virus, in order to go to school. This isn’t polio or measles, diseases that are easily transmitted through casual contact. Infection with this virus requires intimate contact, of the kind that doesn’t occur in classrooms. Besides, we already know how to prevent cervical cancer in this country, and we’ve done a darn good job of it. In the war against cancer, the battle against cervical cancer has been a success story. Why, then, did federal health officials recommend the inoculation of about 30 million American girls and young women against the human papillomavirus, a sexually transmitted disease that in rare cases leads to cervical cancer?

Vaccine supporters say that some 3,700 American women die of cervical cancer each year, and close to 10,000 cases are diagnosed. Cervical cancer has a relatively high survival rate, but every death is tragic and treatment can rob women of their fertility. Still, you have to see the numbers in context. Cervical cancer deaths have been dropping consistently in the United States — and have been for decades. Cervical cancer has gone from being one of the top killers of American women to not even being on the top 10 list. This year cervical cancer will represent just 1 percent of the 679,510 new cancer cases and 1 percent of the 273,560 anticipated cancer deaths among American women. ...

An American Cancer Society spokeswoman said that most American women who get cervical cancer these days are women who either had never had a Pap smear or had not followed the follow-up and frequency guidelines. So perhaps we could redirect the public money that would be spent on this vaccine — one of the most expensive ever, priced at $360 for the series of three shots — to make sure all women in the United States get preventive health care. ...

But vaccines carry risks. In recent years, children have been bombarded with new immunizations, and we still don’t know the full long-term implications. One vaccine, RotaShield, was removed from the market in 1999, just a year after being approved for infants. Merck has tested the cervical cancer vaccine in clinical trials of more than 20,000 women (about half of them got the shot). The health of the subjects was followed for about three and a half years on average. But fewer than 1,200 girls under 16 got the shots, among them only about 100 9-year-olds, Merck officials said, and the younger girls have been followed for only 18 months.

Folks, it's time for a recall election....

[exstatic]

Perry is a whore-like hair-bot.

[MannyIsGod]

Hoooray Cancer!

NBA Dan makes the lives of thousands upon thousands of women appear quite meaningless. After all, the cancer is dwindiling, who cares if we can save lives now.

Repeat after me: Rick Perry bad, Cervical Cancer good!

[MannyIsGod]

The great thing about this debate is that peoples opinions vary by how you present the situation. If you tell them that Perry signed the bill, many liberal leaning people I've come across immediately take a stance against it and try to find information to support that. If you tell that same type of person that many religious groups are against the vaccine, they'll start to tell you why this vaccine is needed.

Oh, I love the way opinions our formed in our current political climate. Wooo!

[JoeChalupa]

And you are just figuring that out!? :lmao

[spurster]

I am surprised and pleased that Perry made this decision. The paper today suggested that his wife lobbied for it.

[Spurminator]

In this case, the end justifies the means.

[xrayzebra]

The great thing about this debate is that peoples opinions vary by how you present the situation. If you tell them that Perry signed the bill, many liberal leaning people I've come across immediately take a stance against it and try to find information to support that. If you tell that same type of person that many religious groups are against the vaccine, they'll start to tell you why this vaccine is needed.

Oh, I love the way opinions our formed in our current political climate. Wooo!

Manny, only problem is that the vaccine is expensive and
most health insurance policies don't cover it. It is a
series of three shots and cost over a hundred dollars a
shot. Maybe the gov should have asked the company
to lower the cost so people could afford it.

I am for giving it to young girls, but it should be left up
to the parents not government. Cervical Cancer is not
a threat to ALL children and cant be caught like mumps,
smallpox or other illness that is transmitted by simple
contact. It is not a public health issue. It is a personal
issue.

[Trainwreck2100]

Manny, only problem is that the vaccine is expensive and
most health insurance policies don't cover it. It is a
series of three shots and cost over a hundred dollars a
shot. Maybe the gov should have asked the company
to lower the cost so people could afford it.

I am for giving it to young girls, but it should be left up
to the parents not government. Cervical Cancer is not
a threat to ALL children and cant be caught like mumps,
smallpox or other illness that is transmitted by simple
contact. It is not a public health issue. It is a personal
issue.

Yes but by making it a requirement insurances will have shell out the dough, and the gov. will foot the bill for the low income so Merck still gets their money.

[Nbadan]

Hoooray Cancer!

NBA Dan makes the lives of thousands upon thousands of women appear quite meaningless. After all, the cancer is dwindiling, who cares if we can save lives now.

Repeat after me: Rick Perry bad, Cervical Cancer good!

:rolleyes

No, Hooray for the 100's, maybe 1000's of kids who will die or suffer mental or physical illnesses as a result of innoculating young girls with a drug that was rushed to market, for a disease that has been on the decline and will probably be cured in the next 10 years.

...and Hooray for the billions of dollars this is needlessly going to cost Texas taxpayers.

[mookie2001]

Hoooray Cancer!

NBA Dan makes the lives of thousands upon thousands of women appear quite meaningless. After all, the cancer is dwindiling, who cares if we can save lives now.

Repeat after me: Rick Perry bad, Cervical Cancer good!manny honestly you think thats a good arguement? thats what youre coming with now. what a post

[Nbadan]

we could spend a fraction of the money on free pelvic exams and cure Cervical cancer.

[01Snake]

That sig is fucking ridiculous!

[thispego]

The great thing about this debate is that peoples opinions vary by how you present the situation. If you tell them that Perry signed the bill, many liberal leaning people I've come across immediately take a stance against it and try to find information to support that. If you tell that same type of person that many religious groups are against the vaccine, they'll start to tell you why this vaccine is needed.

Oh, I love the way opinions our formed in our current political climate. Wooo!
What? but each situation has its own unique circumstances.

only the argumentative types like boutons would do that shit

[Nbadan]

American Academy of Pediatrics urges "go slow" on new HPV vaccine.


Merck, which has been arming its lobbyists across the country with information on the vaccine, has been getting an assist from Women in Government, a nonpartisan organization of female legislators whose agenda includes cervical cancer prevention. The group, like breast-cancer activists before it, works through political channels. It also takes corporate donations from Merck.

But some medical experts say lawmakers are moving too fast in their efforts to vaccinate all school-age girls. The American Academy of Pediatrics, for instance, is urging a go-slow approach, with an initial focus on raising public awareness of HPV and more monitoring of the safety of the vaccine, which had minimal side effects in clinical trials but hasn't been observed in larger-scale rollouts.

"A lot of us are worried it's a little early to be pushing a mandated HPV vaccine," said Dr. Martin Myers, director of the National Network for Immunization Information. "It's not that I'm not wildly enthusiastic about this vaccine. I am. But many of us are concerned a mandate may be premature, and it's important for people to realize that this isn't as clear-cut as with some previous vaccines."

and the money-shot:

He added, "It's not the vaccine community pushing for this."

Baltimore Sun (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/politics/bal-te.md.cervical29jan29,0,2725203.story?coll=bal-mdpolitics-headlines)

[MannyIsGod]

For every doctor you post that is worried, there are 10 out there that aren't. The success rate of this vaccine is unprecedented and we're having to hear about unsubsatantiated crap.

Cancer > Merck apparently.

[Spurminator]

Finally Big Government enacts legislation that actually HELPS the "little person" - the kind of person who either doesn't or can't get regular pap smears and checkups - and we've got nutjobs protesting on account of a Republican Governor's ties to the drug company.

I can't decide which argument is more ludicrous... that, or the contention that this vaccine will encourage promiscuity among 11 year olds. (Do any of you remember knowing or caring what you were getting shots for when you were in grade school?)

The only argument that has any merit is whether it is safe enough for the public. Maybe if opponents would focus on that aspect and not water the discussion down with ridiculous crap, they could better communicate any potential risks.

[scott]

we could spend a fraction of the money on free pelvic exams and cure Cervical cancer.

Of course... the cure to cervical cancer is free pelvic exams! ITS SO OBVIOUS!

[Nbadan]

Of course... the cure to cervical cancer is free pelvic exams! ITS SO OBVIOUS!

Early detection is the cure!

[Extra Stout]

For every doctor you post that is worried, there are 10 out there that aren't. The success rate of this vaccine is unprecedented and we're having to hear about unsubsatantiated crap.

Cancer > Merck apparently.
More succinctly, petty partisanship > curing cancer.

[mookie2001]

if by curing cancer you mean may be preventing genital warts

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Okay so....how are all these vaccinations going to be paid for?

[mookie2001]

you cant put a price on cancer

[Nbadan]

Cancer is vicious, but HPV isn't a communicable disease like the measles or polio, unless, you engage in unprotected sex with multiple partners, and don't have regular pap smears or cervix exams. There's no joy in regular prostate or rectal exams for men, but if you don't get them over 40, your increasing the chance that you will be a victim of these diseases.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Cherry pickers don't address facts, only circumstantial bull shit

[Cant_Be_Faded]

lol
im willing to bet most male posters in this very thread are carrying a potentially cancer causing agent in their body

[gtownspur]

Okay so....how are all these vaccinations going to be paid for?


Y da fuck do you care?


This is hilarious. Let's pay for welfare and subsidized healthcare but screw cancer.

[mookie2001]

if by cancer you mean genital warts

[ChumpDumper]

It'll be interesting to see if the lege does anything more than ask Rick pretty please rescind the order.

[sabar]

Big problem.

First, cerivcal cancer has a 40% mortality rate. Reasons. One, not enough early detection. Two, very aggressive cancer. If not detected early it spreads to the bladder, intestines, and the rest of the body, where the patient is then considered terminally ill.

Cervical cancer claims 4,000 people a year and is diagnosed 10,000 times a year.
Heart disease claims 900,000 a year. Lung cancer grabs another 175,000 a year. When is the last time that taking aspirin or outlawing smoking came up?

There are roughly 2.2 million people that could be affected by the vaccine in Texas. Remember the 4,000 a year dead in the US? An average of 304 of those come from Texas.

A vaccine for 2.2 million young people for a cancer that kills 304 people a year.
79,000 die each year in Texas, 304 of those from cervical cancer.

1 in 259 people will die from cervical cancer in Texas.

WORLDWIDE
1 in 3.4 will die from heart disease.
1 in 5 will die from infectionous disease.
1 in 8 die from cancer.
1 in 10 die from stroke.
1 in 23 die from external injury.
1 in 33 from diarrhea.
1 in 50 from car accident.
1 in 66 from suicide.
1 in 102 from violence.
1 in 119 from breast cancer.
1 in 149 from drowning.
1 in 181 from fire.
1 in 218 die from falling.
1 in 238 from cervical cancer.
1 in 666 from drug abuse.
1 in 672 from accidental suffocation
1 in 1,313 from medical/surgical complications
1 in 1,829 from stabbing
1 in 5,051 from airplane crash
1 in 5,134 from accidental firearms discharge
1 in 8,988 from falling out of a tall building
1 in 79,746 from being hit by lightning
1 in 117,127 from a dog attack or bite
1 in 1,874,034 from venomous snakes

Is it worth it? Gut feeling says no, but the chances of the vaccine killing 1 in 259 is pretty low, so unless there are serious side effects, it is a statistical advantage for women to get the vaccine. Of course, it is a massive cost ($726 odd million to vaccinate 2.2 million young people) to save a potential 304 a year. The first people saved would be worth $2 million each.

Too much for too little. Imagine how many might be saved is the government put $726 million into cancer research, aids research, or even in incentive programs for organ donors. If the government gave $10,000 to a person for donating a kidney, you could have 72,600 more kidney transplants and save the lives of 72,600 people instead of 304 a year.

Whatever. It's all about the money sadly.

[Crookshanks]

Cancer is vicious, but HPV isn't a communicable disease like the measles or polio, unless, you engage in unprotected sex with multiple partners, and don't have regular pap smears or cervix exams. There's no joy in regular prostate or rectal exams for men, but if you don't get them over 40, your increasing the chance that you will be a victim of these diseases.
I wasn't going to share my story because of the highly personal nature; however, I've changed my mind because of this very post!

I am a survivor of HPV. I was involved with a man almost 20 years ago (after my divorce) that gave me HPV. I wasn't promiscuous and this was a long-term relationship. We weren't even aware he carried the disease until a woman with whom he'd had a previous relationship years before contacted him because she had the disease and it had developed into cancer.

I started having abnormal pap smears and different treatment options were discussed. However, the disease never seemed to get any worse, so the doctor said wait. I remarried 8 years later and never gave the disease a second thought. However, that pesky little virus was still there and I started having abnormal pap smears every year. This finally led to a hysterectomy in 1998 and we thought everything was taken care of. Again, we were wrong! Two years ago, I had another abnormal pap smear and was referred to an gynocological oncologist. I had to undergo treatment for pre-cancerous cells!

Believe me, all the treatments I had over the years added up to WAY more than the cost of the vaccine! So you see, Dan, you really don't know what you're talking about and, especially since you're a man, you shouldn't make judgments about something that doesn't affect you!

[mookie2001]

so if you had a young daughter you would take her to get the shot? great, but that really doesnt have much to do with giving every girl in texas a shot to prevent genital warts from now until the fall of society

[Nbadan]

I wasn't going to share my story because of the highly personal nature; however, I've changed my mind because of this very post!

I am a survivor of HPV. I was involved with a man almost 20 years ago (after my divorce) that gave me HPV. I wasn't promiscuous and this was a long-term relationship. We weren't even aware he carried the disease until a woman with whom he'd had a previous relationship years before contacted him because she had the disease and it had developed into cancer.

I started having abnormal pap smears and different treatment options were discussed. However, the disease never seemed to get any worse, so the doctor said wait. I remarried 8 years later and never gave the disease a second thought. However, that pesky little virus was still there and I started having abnormal pap smears every year. This finally led to a hysterectomy in 1998 and we thought everything was taken care of. Again, we were wrong! Two years ago, I had another abnormal pap smear and was referred to an gynocological oncologist. I had to undergo treatment for pre-cancerous cells!

Believe me, all the treatments I had over the years added up to WAY more than the cost of the vaccine! So you see, Dan, you really don't know what you're talking about and, especially since you're a man, you shouldn't make judgments about something that doesn't affect you!


Thanks for sharing Crooks. I know personal health issues are always difficult to post about. I didn't mean to imply anything about your or anyone else's permiscuity, or lack thereof: I really meant to point out that cancer is a sad fact of life, but it doesn't always have to be a death sentence, especially in today's medicine.

This vaccine, mandatory for all 16 year old girls, is made of protein antibodies which the body should be able to safely absorb, but I feel that not enough clinical tests have been done regarding the long and short term toxicity of the drug which TX is going to inject to 6-8 million girls. A 18 month study on less than 10000 participants just isn't enough for me to want to inject it into my or anyone else young daughter, even if in the long run it may save them from cancer.

[Spurminator]

What kinds of studies are standard for a vaccine like this?

I'll buy that it's inadequately tested, but I don't have any context and my Google searches have been fruitless.

[Nbadan]

I'll try and look those up, but I believe this vaccine was 'fast-tracked' on to the market quickly by new FDA standards, meanwhile, some things to think about...


1. There have been no safety studies for prepubescant recipients, but it's being proposed to be given to all girls at ages as young as 9.

2. It is being billed as a "cancer vaccine" when in fact it guards against a family of viruses that have been shown to have an association with a 1.5% increase in the risk of cervical cancer. The vast majority of women who get HPV never develop cervical cancer, and a large number of women who never carry HPV do develop cervical cancer. It is not known if the 1.5% increase in cancer risk represents cancer being caused by the virus or elevated common risk factors for both cancer and the virus. Furthermore, in no sense will this vaccination mean you should not continue to be on the watch for cancer.

3. In just the past few years we have seen the pharmaceutical community rush out several "neccessary" drugs for this or that dangerous condition, which turned out to be more dangerous than the condition itself (post-hysterectomy HRT, ant-statins, VIOXX, etc). In each case, legal proceedings have shown that the safety study infrastructure for pharmaceuticals is, to put it bluntly, broken industry-wide. These tragic stories should teach us all that if you simply trust corporate-funded science you take your life in your hands in the process.

4. This is a re-statement of number 2 because I think it really deserves emphasis: no-one has ever said HPV "causes" cervical cancer. Carrying some strains of HPV is associated with a 1.5%-higher risk of cervical cancer than the negative population. The majority of sexually active adults carry HPV, the vast majority of these will never develop cervical cancer. We do not know if HPV causes cervical cancer, or if it shares common risk factors with cervical cancer; in fact, we know of one common risk factor they both share (early sexual activity). So we know at least some portion of that 1.5% increase is not from HPV but from that one shared risk factor, and there may be (and probably are) others. To the extent that HPV and cervical cancer share risk factors, this vaccine will do nothing but prevent warts.

[mookie2001]

plus its unsafe if youre pregnant, and giving every 11-12 year old girl in texas 3 pregancy tests a year seems stupid

[Nbadan]

Not to mention that are serious concerns as to whether Perry's executive order was even legal...McCown, a retired state judge and executive director of the Center for Public Policy Priorities writes...


Under the state constitution, the governor administers the law; the governor doesn't make the law. This principle is textbook civics. Making law is for the Legislature.

With this principle so clear, how can the governor possibly claim the authority to require vaccinations? Well, when the Legislature passes a law, it cannot think of every detail, particularly in our increasingly complex world. To deal with the details, the Legislature often authorizes a state agency to adopt rules. So, in his executive order, the governor hasn't actually required vaccinations; rather, he has ordered a state agency to write a rule requiring vaccinations.

Rules, however, must be consistent with state law and must implement, not expand, the law. To ensure that rules comply with the law, the Legislature requires a state agency to go through a careful process of evaluating its legal authority before adopting a rule. In addition, to ensure that a rule is wise, the Legislature requires a state agency to give the public notice of any proposed rule, give the public a chance to comment, consider the public's comments and provide a written justification for the final rule.

Statesmen (http://www.statesman.com/search/content/region/legislature/stories/02/07/7mccown_edit_rs.html)

[Nbadan]

Buck Wood, a lawyer whose career included time in Gov. John Connally's office in the 1960s, disagreed, saying: "This isn't even arguable. The governor doesn't have any power to dictate to any agency about what rules it makes."

Scott McCown, who served 14 years as a Democratic state district judge in Travis County, aired similar concerns. While state law permits governors to issue orders in emergencies, he said, Perry's desire to protect young women doesn't clear that hurdle.

"It's a judgment call," said McCown, who initially commented in a column in Wednesday's Austin American-Statesman. "But there is no way this is even close. There is no way this even qualifies" as an emergency.

Statesmen (http://www.statesman.com/search/content/shared/partners/Special_Edition/stories/2007/02/TEXAS_ORDERS_0208_COX.html)

[Nbadan]

Twenty-six senators from both parties even signed a letter asking Perry to withdraw the order.

News8 Austin (http://www.news8austin.com/content/headlines/?ArID=178886&SecID=2)

[ChumpDumper]

Wow, the lege is really asserting its power.

A letter!

Signed!

[Nbadan]

Despite doubts by Chumpy, lawmakers continue to lay the political wood to Perry


Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) says that it's just a coincidence that he and eight other lawmakers received donations of $5,000 each from Merck lobbyists just a few days before mandating the drug giant's HPV cervical cancer vaccine for all females in Texas ages 12 and up.

"There's been a lot of pressure about the implications of vaccinating young girls against sexually-transmitted diseases," says CNN's Ali Velshi in the video below, "some people thinking that that encourages promiscuity at that age."

He reports though that "this thing is coming undone by word, rumor and report of connection between Rick Perry's office and Merck."

The main lobbyist for Merck previously worked as Chief of Staff for Gov. Rick Perry. Several other states are considering making the vaccine mandatory, thanks in part to Merck's aggressive lobbying.

Rawstory (http://www.rawstory.com//news/2007/TX_Gov._Perry_took_Merck_money_0222.html)

Perry's approval rating has to be approaching Dubya range.

[sabar]

Yeah yeah people have that "it doesn't affect men" arguement.

I wouldn't be rushing to take a new vaccine for penile cancer. Nor would I ever do that to a child. There's probably a better chance of dying from complications of the vaccine than there is of getting HPV and getting cancer.

People sure forgot about Vioxx fast.

And this legal order to vaccinate wasn't even legal.

[BIG IRISH]

The truth is coming out but will it stop him?

Feb 22, 8:29 PM EST
Texas Governor Defends Vaccine Order

By JOE STINEBAKER and LIZ AUSTIN PETERSON
Associated Press Writers
HOUSTON (AP) -- Gov. Rick Perry on Thursday angrily defended his relationship with Merck & Co. and his executive order requiring that schoolgirls receive the drugmaker's vaccine against the sexually transmitted cervical-cancer virus.

The Associated Press reported Wednesday that Perry's chief of staff had met with key aides about the vaccine on Oct. 16, the same day Merck's political action committee donated $5,000 to the governor's campaign. :rolleyes

Perry, touring cancer centers around the state, said the contributions were just a small share of the $24 million he raised and had no effect on his decision.

"When a company comes to me and says we have a cure for cancer, for me not to say, 'Please come into my office and let's hear your story for the people of the state of Texas, for young ladies who are dying of cancer,' would be the height of irresponsibility," the Republican governor said. "Whether or not they contributed to my campaign, I would suggest to you, are some of those weeds that we are trying to cut our way through."

Pressed on when he decided to issue the Feb. 2 executive order requiring the vaccination for sixth-grade girls, Perry snapped: "I wish you all would quit splitting hairs, frankly, and get focused on 'Are we going to be working together to find the cure for cancers?' No, I can't tell you when." :dramaquee

In issuing the order, the governor made Texas the first state to require the vaccine Gardasil for all schoolgirls. But many lawmakers have complained about his bypassing the Legislature altogether. And the disclosure regarding the campaign contributions could add momentum to an attempt by legislators to repeal Perry's executive order.

The executive order has inflamed conservatives, who said it contradicts Texas' abstinence-only sexual education policies and intrudes into families' lives.

Some GOP lawmakers said they were uncomfortable with the timing of the contributions.

"It's really a question of integrity ... whether or not his decisions were based on the contribution," state Rep. Linda Harper Brown.

On Wednesday, before the campaign contributions became known, the state House public health committee voted 6-3 to override Perry's order and sent the bill - co-sponsored by nearly two-thirds of state representatives - to the full House.

The House is not expected to take up the measure until mid-March. A repeal has also been introduced in the Senate, with nearly half the chamber signing on.

Perry said he has not decided whether to veto the bill if it reaches his desk.

"I highly respect the legislative process that we have, and so I would respectfully tell you that we will let it play its way out," he said. "But do you think we would be having the debate today on HPV if I had said, 'Let's pass some legislation?'"

Critics have previously questioned Perry's ties to Merck. Mike Toomey, Perry's former chief of staff, now lobbies for the drug company. And the governor accepted a total of $6,000 from Merck during his re-election campaign.

Merck has waged a behind-the-scenes lobbying campaign to get state legislatures to require girls to get the three-dose vaccine to enroll in school. But on Tuesday the pharmaceutical company announced it was suspending the effort because of pressure from parents and medical groups.
The Kentucky House on Thurday passed a bill that would require the vaccination for middle school girls unless their parents sign a form opposing it. The state has the nation's second-highest death rate from cervical cancer, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; the bill still needs Senate approval. Virginia lawmakers have also passed legislation requiring the vaccine, but the governor has not decided if he will sign it.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/TEXAS_CANCER_VACCINE?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US


Vaccine Meeting, Merck Donation Coincide

By LIZ AUSTIN PETERSON
Associated Press Writer

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- Gov. Rick Perry's chief of staff met with key aides about a new vaccine to prevent cervical cancer on the same day its manufacturer donated money to his campaign, documents obtained by The Associated Press show.

Texas became the first state to require the vaccine against human papillomavirus earlier this month when Perry issued an executive order requiring it for girls entering sixth grade. Lawmakers are considering overriding the measure.

A calendar for chief of staff Deirdre Delisi obtained under Texas' open records laws shows she met with the governor's budget director and three members of his office for an "HPV Vaccine for Children Briefing" on Oct. 16. That same day, Merck & Co.'s political action committee donated $5,000 to Perry and a total of $5,000 to eight state lawmakers.

Perry spokesman Robert Black said the timing of the meeting and the donation was a coincidence. "There was no discussion of any kind of mandates," Black said.

The documents obtained Wednesday by The AP provide new detail about the relationship between the governor's office and Merck, which makes the only HPV vaccine on the market.

Perry's mandate has inflamed conservatives, who say it contradicts Texas' abstinence-only sexual education policies and intrudes too far into families' lives. Though there is a provision in state law that allows parents to opt out of the vaccine, opponents say the shots are too new and too costly to force on young girls.

Merck had waged a behind-the-scenes lobbying campaign to get state legislatures to require 11- and 12-year-old girls to get the three-dose vaccine against the virus that can cause cervical cancer as a requirement for school attendance. But it announced Tuesday it was suspending those efforts after its motives were questioned. The New Jersey company stands to make billions if Gardasil is required nationwide.

Critics had previously questioned Perry's ties to the company. Mike Toomey, Perry's former chief of staff and Delisi's predecessor, lobbies for Merck. And the governor accepted a total of $6,000 from Merck during his re-election campaign, including $1,000 in December 2005.

According to Delisi's calendar, she met with Toomey three times in the six months before the order was issued. One meeting happened in August, on the same day two other Perry staffers met with a different Merck lobbyist for a "Merck HPV Vaccine update." The other meetings came just after the November election and just before the legislative session began in January.

Black initially said he did not know what the two discussed, but later said the November and January meetings involved another company Toomey lobbies for. He also said the pair have been friends for years, and that Toomey has many clients other than Merck. He insisted that the governor did not decide to issue the mandate until well after the November election.

Late Wednesday, Black issued a statement: "The Associated Press has tried to create a conspiracy where none exists, and they have offered not one shred of evidence to their baseless accusations that the governor's office has done anything wrong."

Merck spokesman Ray Kerins, reached after business hours, said he could not immediately comment but would look into the matter. Calls seeking comment were made to a home number for Delisi and an office number for Toomey, but were not immediately returned.

Cathie Adams, president of the conservative Texas Eagle Forum, said Black's explanation of the timing of the campaign contribution didn't sound right.

"We have too many coincidences," she said. "I think that the voters of Texas would find that very hard to swallow."

Bills have been introduced in about 20 states to require the vaccine, but they have struggled. Some parents' groups and doctors particularly object because the vaccine protects against a sexually transmitted disease. Vaccines mandated for school attendance usually are for diseases easily spread through casual contact, such as measles and mumps.

A bill has passed the Virginia Legislature, but a spokesman for Gov. Timothy Kaine said he wants to review a provision that lets parents opt out before he says if he will sign it.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CANCER_VACCINE_TEXAS?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2007-02-21-22-56-30

I guess when only 37% of the folks vote for you you can say to Hell with
it. I'm taking what I can get while I still have time.

[boutons_]

BBC NEWS

Gay men seek 'female cancer' jab

By Michelle Roberts
BBC News health reporter

Homosexual men are requesting a controversial "sex disease" vaccine designed to prevent a female cancer.

Gardasil protects against the most common of sexually transmitted infections, human papillomavirus (HPV), which can cause cervical cancer.

But HPV also causes genital warts and anal and penile cancer, and men argue the jab would guard against these.

Many private clinics are offering it to men. One in London says it has immunised dozens in the last six weeks.

Controversy

Gardasil has been causing controversy since it was launched in the UK late last year, mainly because it is designed to be given to children before they become sexually active and can catch HPV.

The government is considering whether all girls, and possibly boys, aged 11 or 12 should get it routinely in schools, ultimately to cut cervical cancer rates.

Gardasil is licensed for boys and girls aged nine to 15 and women aged 16 to 26. But doctors can opt to give it to other people "off licence" if they wish.

Strong demand

Dr Sean Cummings at the Freedom Health clinic in Harley Street, where dozens of men have had the jab, said he was happy to recommend Gardasil to his adult men, at £450 for a three-dose course.

"We've had a strong demand for it. I had a man come in for the vaccine this morning. He was 24. Then I have one this afternoon who is 67 years old.

"The motivation is to protect themselves and to prevent spreading HPV to their partners."

Opponents say there is no point in immunising people who are already sexually active.

More proof

But Dr Paul Fox, a genito-urinary medicine expert at the Chelsea and Westminster and Ealing hospitals, believes it can be worthwhile.

He argues that it is unlikely a person will have encountered all of the four strains of HPV found in Gardasil, including the two linked to cancers, even if they are leading a very promiscuous sex life.

"We should not just be looking at vaccinating people in their pre-teen years. Other people would benefit as well."

Dr Jo Longstaff, of the Independent General Practice private clinic in Cardiff, which also offers the Gardasil vaccine, agrees.

"Our first enquiry about Gardasil was from a male patient. I think they should be considering it."

Dr Anne Szarewski, clinical consultant for Cancer Research UK who has been involved in evaluating both Merck's Gardasil and GSK's rival jab Cervarix, says there may be a case for immunising men.

"Men who have sex with men are at a much higher risk than average of anal cancer and genital warts, particularly if they are HIV-positive.

"Clearly it would be very important if the vaccine could protect. The problem is we do need proof."

Trials in men

Merck is currently testing the vaccine's efficacy in 4,000 men, including 500 men who have sex with men.

And the US National Institute of Health is also carrying out trials to see what benefits it could have for people with HIV.

Merck said its priority was to tackle cervical cancer, but has not ruled out giving the vaccine to other groups - including men who have sex with men.

Roger Peabody of the Terrence Higgins Trust said if the trials were successful, there would be a good case for vaccinating young boys, not only to stop the spread of HPV to women, but to protect men against HPV-related disease.

Dr Szarewski agreed, saying: "It is bad enough suggesting to people that their 12-year-old daughter might need a vaccine against a sexually transmitted infection.

"I would be interested to see the response of suggesting to parents that they should vaccinate their boys at 12 in case they become gay."

She said heterosexual men and women also risked anal cancer.

About 400 people are diagnosed with anal cancer each year in the UK. The disease is slightly more common in women than men.

Story from BBC NEWS:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/health/6342105.stm

Published: 2007/02/23 00:03:51 GMT

© BBC MMVII

[BIG IRISH]

According to former rumors which were disproved, :rolleyes Rick Perry
should have gotten this shot than ??

[AFE7FATMAN]

Texas Families Seek to Block Gov's Order
Friday Feb 23rd
By
JIM VERTUNO

AUSTIN, Texas - A group of families has sued in an attempt to block Gov. Rick Perry's executive order requiring schoolgirls to be vaccinated against the virus that causes cervical cancer.

The lawsuit challenges Perry's authority to issue the order and seeks to block any state money from being spent on the vaccine until that question is resolved, said Kenneth Chaiken, the attorney representing the families.

"The school-age girls of Texas are not guinea pigs who may be subjected to medial procedures at the apparent whim of Texas' governor," according to the lawsuit, which was filed Thursday in Travis County.

Perry, a Republican, wants to require the vaccine for girls entering sixth grade. It protects against strains of human papapillomavirus, or HPV, that cause most cases of cervical cancer and genital warts.

Supporters of the vaccine requirement say it will help fight a cancer that kills 3,700 American women each year.

But the order has inflamed conservatives who say it contradicts Texas' abstinence-only sexual education policies and intrudes into family lives. Chaiken said the lawsuit does not raise that moral objection.

Perry is confident he had the authority to issue the order, his spokeswoman Krista Moody said.

"He sees this vaccine as not only a fiscally responsible order but also one that has the potential to save the lives of thousands of women in Texas," Moody said.

The governor's order also upset many lawmakers in his own party, and a bill to override the measure is moving through the state

:clap :clap :clap :clap :clap
http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/851974/texas_families_seek_to_block_govs_order/index.html

[Cant_Be_Faded]

mannyisAbsent?