Gardasil - A UK tabloid's take

[lizziec]

The Daily Mail enter into the debate over Gardasil using a family argument over it to look at the arguments for and against it. The mother wants her daughter to have the vaccine and the father initially didn't even want to discuss it before being eventually (apparently) bullied into agreeing that she should have it. His argument is the common one - he didn't want her to feel she should go out and have sex before she was 16 or 18 (ages quoted in the article).

The bit that annoyed me was "An HPV infection — which only occasionally leads to cervical cancer — is more likely the more sexual partners a woman has. But it seems to fail to acknowledge that it could happen the first time, and that could lead to pre cancerous cells or even cancer.

Anyway, it also gives the information that us UK ladies can have it privately for £400 through a private doctor (which I didn't know before and is possibly the only thing I found informative about the article).

Comments

[chaeri.livejournal.com]

the reason why that sort of rationale bothers me so much is that it assumes that STDs are only passed by sex. many are fluid borne, and HPV is skin borne. a friend of mine is convinced that she got it from sharing a bathing suit with an infected friend. even if she got it from her friend some other way, most STDs can be passed without sex. they are just known as STDs because they will be passed that way and its the most common way to pass an STD. NOT the ONLY way.

[archangelbeth]

Not to mention that STDs can be passed on by non-consensual sex as well, adding injury to injury.

[etherealfire.livejournal.com]

EXACTLY! Sorry, the whole 'it encourages pre-marital sex' crap is annoying, but the fact that non-con isn't even CONSIDERED pisses me off

[archangelbeth]

*solemnly hi-5s*
Exactly. I will try to to suppress my rant about this.

[chaeri.livejournal.com]

that is very true, too.

[paraxeni.livejournal.com]

Don't you just love The Daily Fail. Of course by 'love' I mean 'want to set them all on fire'.

[lizziec]

It's funny - that is exactly how they make me feel. Glad to know it's not just me! :)

[leyo.livejournal.com]

Urgh, me too.

[sodivided.livejournal.com]

And me! I skim-read this article (my mum buys the paper :\) and it left me rather annoyed.

[achtungbaby80.livejournal.com]

I really don't like the attitude that "OMG this vaccine encourages teen girls to turn into whores!!!!!" but meh...what else is new? It's kind of sad, really, because you can get HPV even if you only have one partner ever in your lifetime. It took me forever to find a doctor I liked because most of them took a look at my chart and saw 'HPV--abnormal paps' and immediately assumed I was promiscuous.

This kind of surprises me, though--I thought the UK would be at least a little more open-minded than we are here in the States. Hmmm...

[lizziec]

I thought the UK would be at least a little more open-minded than we are here in the States.

I don't know if we are or not, but please don't judge us based on the Daily Mail! :) It's possibly the most reactionary and conservative newspaper that we have and frequently makes me throw my hands in the air and go "arrrgh!!!" Clearly I'm not the only one (yay!) looking at the comments above yours :)

[achtungbaby80.livejournal.com]

Well, on second thought, going by the Star, I guess you all are way more laid-back than we are. :-P

[ariagirl2010.livejournal.com]

That comment makes me VERY angry. As you all may have seen, I have HPV and I had only had 2 partners, spanning MANY years. That attitude is injurious and falsely accusatory.

[asscollection.livejournal.com]

Yeah, like others have said, no one needs to be promiscuous to get an STI.

My mom got cervical cancer causing HPV and she's only had sex with two people.