American College of Pediatricians issues Gardasil concern

[Erin1700]

A friend of DD15 got the shots. About a month after getting the last one, she had a seizure and was diagnosed with epilepsy. The mom blames the shot. BUT she got the shots as she was going through puberty. And she had febrile seizures as a baby. My DD had febrile seizures as a baby too. The one thing we were always told, was that my DD was at risk for epilepsy once she started puberty.
So the mom is very vocal against the shot, but how can you really prove anything.

My DD got the shots and has been fine.

 

[Deb in IA]

I don't happen to hold with that particular belief held by the American College of Pediatricians. Saw the article, thought it was interesting, and posted it.
Aren't you a doctor? Do you believe and listen to 100% of what the AM, FDA and CDC publish? I'm not talking about vaccines in particular. My point is a site can have compelling information even if we don't happen to agree with everything posted on the site. Lord knows we come to the Dis and get good information about touring Disney even though we do not agree with everything posted here.

Yes, I am a pediatrician.
And, since you asked, I believe in what is supported by data and science, not anecdotal reports from 3 (!) cases, and promoted by a site that has a clearly biased agenda.

In analyzing information, it is important to look at the source.
Did you know that American College of Pediatricians was formed in opposition to the American Academy of Pediatricians (AAP), and it advocates (among others):

• Discouraging the adoption of children by same-sex couples or single parents;

• Opposition to marijuana legalization;

• Support for selective parental use of disciplinary spanking in child discipline;

• Opposition to abortion and euthanasia;

• Opposition to gender reassignment, including the use of puberty blockers;

• Support for abstinence until marriage sex education rather than comprehensive sex education

Take the time to read some of the excellent references Geoff posted above. I think you will find them quite enlightening.

 

[robinb]

I got the first shot in the Gardasil series as an adult, even though I already had/have a strain of HPV (one of the cancer-causing strains, which has been fun). I was forced into it as an adult by a nasty, inconsiderate, rude, dismissive, intimidating doctor. I threw up and felt weak & dizzy before ever leaving the office. I never went back for the subsequent shots; I was in a monogamous relationship with my now-husband and, as I said, already had (at least) one strain of HPV; and after how I felt after the first shot, I wasn't going back for more.

I am still battling the cervical issues that have come up due to the HPV. I've had numerous pap smears and cervical biopsies, as well as a LEEP procedure (this is where they literally cut & burn away a chunk of your cervix). The LEEP did not end with clear margins so my pap smears still come back "bad" and I've been urged to have more cervical biopsies and likely LEEP procedures, which I'm really just not interested in. I firmly believe that I have PTSD due to the trauma of everything that went on, including the procedures themselves and the doctors who performed them. I have yet to meet a gyn who understands how absolutely disgusting and invasive I find these procedures to be and understands the mental toll they take on me. (/ side rant)

All of that said, I don't think that I could in good conscience let my (hypothetical) daughter receive this vaccine. I got sick from it, but entirely too many other girls and women have gotten way sicker from it. This vaccine was released prematurely and needed more testing. I want to see what the long-term results are when all of the 12-year-old girls who are getting it now grow up and try to reproduce, etc. I'm not an anti-vaxxer by any means; my future hypothetical children will definitely be vaccinated against polio, mumps, rubella, measles, whooping cough, chicken pox, etc. But I don't think this HPV vaccine is a good idea right now. And I say that as someone with HPV and who has had a lot of trauma relating to it.

I am so sorry {{hugs}}. I too have had a LEEP and a Conal Biopsy due to the HPV I contracted when I was in my 20's. I had to be on bedrest when I was pregnant with my DD in my late 30's because they thought that I would lose her as roseaster's friend lost her babies. I was lucky that I carried my DD to term and I found the DIS while waiting for her to be born . Those experiences made me make the exact opposite decision about vaccinating my DD. If I could prevent her from going through what I went through then I was all-in.

Like roseaster, I am concerned for you. You say that your mom and sister are nurses. Is it possible that they can ask around and find a GYN who is more sympathetic and kind? Could one of them come to the appointments with you to be your support and advocate? Perhaps you can work with a mental professional to overcome your PTSD? Treatment for HPV is scary and traumatic but the possibility of dying from cervical cancer is even more scary for me.

 

[roseaster]

Yes, I am a pediatrician.
And, since you asked, I believe in what is supported by data and science, not anecdotal reports from 3 (!) cases, and promoted by a site that has a clearly biased agenda.

In analyzing information, it is important to look at the source.
Did you know that American College of Pediatricians was formed in opposition to the American Academy of Pediatricians (AAP), and it advocates (among others):

• Discouraging the adoption of children by same-sex couples or single parents;

• Opposition to marijuana legalization;

• Support for selective parental use of disciplinary spanking in child discipline;

• Opposition to abortion and euthanasia;

• Opposition to gender reassignment, including the use of puberty blockers;

• Support for abstinence until marriage sex education rather than comprehensive sex education

Take the time to read some of the excellent references Geoff posted above. I think you will find them quite enlightening.

My kids' pediatrician is also my friend. She and I have very, very different personal views on things. She is much, much more conservative than I. That being said, having discussed this with her she told me this:

We can teach our kids abstinence and to wait until marriage, and to only have one partner, but we can't guarantee that the partners our children choose were taught the same thing, or if they were adhered to it. For that matter, we can teach our kids our values and hope that they incorporate them into their lives, but they are individuals, and as they mature they will make their own decisions, whether we agree with them or not. We can, at least, keep them safe.

The other issue that people overlook, and it isn't a pleasant issue is that, unfortunately, for some children they don't get to choose whether, or not, to abstain. Unfortunately sexual abuse is a reality. The horrible effects of abuse should not be compounded by cancer.

I think, being in the medical profession, we have an advantage to know the difference between a scholarly, peer reviewed article by a reliable source, and a mainstream media piece that is designed to sway opinions.

 

[NHdisneylover]

I can fully understand that someone might have held off or decided against this newer vaccine if they felt it was too new to know all the long term effects on reproduction, etc. I didn't make that decision but I can understand it IF it is made after reading and researching well supported scientific reports and data. (DD19 got the shots right after she turned 11, when they were brand new, my mom had cervical cancer from HPV at 35 and I saw that first hand and was thrilled to be able to make that less of a possibility for my daughter).

But I don't understand/respect someone who makes medical decisions based on unsupported reports from clearly biased organizations and I find it irresponsible to pass on those reports in a way that indicates that they might come from a respected organization and hold real scientific merit.

 

[Geoff_M]

My point is a site can have compelling information even if we don't happen to agree with everything posted on the site.

I agree, but there's that word "compelling" that you rightly include as a qualifier. The information behind the ACoP press release you posted is anything but "compelling." "Headline grabbing"? Yes. "Designed to excite parents and make them cut-n-paste their PR all over social media in an effort to sow fear, uncertainty, and doubt"? Yes, without a doubt. But for reasons Deb and I have already stated here, there's nothing "new" or "compelling" about what the ACoP is trying to sell with regards to the HPV vaccine.

Personally, while I'm ideologically sympathetic to the ACoP's position on legalizing pot, I think it would be equally silly of them to issue a press release that used as its centerpiece a couple case studies of three people that developed brain tumors at some time after smoking pot and speculate that THC causes such cancers because it is known that pot affects brain function. What they're trying to pull with the HPV vaccine is effectively the same thing.

Do you believe and listen to 100% of what the AM, FDA and CDC publish?

I like your use of the word "believe" here and think it's very appropriate. Because science and belief are two very different things. Science follows the data, wherever it leads, and is self-correcting when new insights can be repeatably demonstrated. I've also learned that often times all of the weight of the science in the world cannot overcome an ounce of belief. I also realize that sometimes groups of scientists can come to different interpretations over the same set of data, but this should be accompanied by a degree of objectivity and not be due to the influence of confirmation bias.

 

[jrmasm]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/22/health/hpv-vaccine-teen-girls-effective/index.html