Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Parents block plans to vaccinate nine-year-olds against sex virus

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Scotland On Sunday site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
07 January 2007
WORRIED parents have blocked government plans to vaccinate girls as young as nine against a sexually-transmitted virus that can cause cervical cancer, Scotland on Sunday can reveal.
Health chiefs have abandoned proposals to offer the jab against human papilloma virus (HPV) to primary school children after parents complained that it was inappropriate for girls of such a young age.

Scotland on Sunday revealed last summer that
ministers were considering offering the jab to children in a desperate attempt to stop the "epidemic" in cervical cancer. The proposals for a nationwide scheme followed successful trials of a new vaccine in Glasgow.

But ministers have now been forced to concentrate on plans for the treatment on girls of at least 12 - itself a hugely controversial move.

In September, the European Commission licensed the first HPV vaccine, Gardasil, for use by females aged between nine and 26.

But campaigners protested that immunising young girls from HPV, which can cause genital warts and is blamed for up to 70% of cases of cervical cancer, could encourage them to start having sex earlier.

The government U-turn came after medical experts who make the final recommendations on the baseline defences against HPV were warned of parents' opposition. The experts also threw out proposals to vaccinate boys against HPV, despite evidence that they can transmit the virus through sexual contact.

Documents from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) reveal the Department of Health has been conducting inquiries into the delicate proposition of vaccinating children for more than a year.

"Research has already been carried out on the attitudes of parents to the vaccination of children of eight to 10 years of age - ie in the last years of primary school," a meeting of the JCVI's HPV sub-group was told in September.

"Parents were of the opinion that this should be carried out in older children at secondary school, in conjunction with a sexual education programme -through Personal and Social Education (PSE)."

The trials in Scotland, which involved 300 women aged 16 to 23, were criticised by the Catholic Church, which said they would lead to children being vaccinated.

In Scotland, more than 500 women are diagnosed with cervical cancer every year and around 100 die.

The trials of Gardasil proved the vaccine to be highly effective against HPV, but experts say the treatment is best administered before women become sexually active.

The experts, who are expected to give ministers a final recommendation within the next few weeks, will not give the green light to a new vaccination programme without a commitment to a revamped sex-education programme led by school nurses.



The full article contains 450 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Doreen,

The Cyber Shebeen 07/01/2007 01:04:32

Sounds great but why so young?

2

druidh,

07/01/2007 01:19:02

"parents were of the opinion" . . Which parents? I don't recall being asked my opinion.

3

Gnasher,

07/01/2007 02:44:56

Doreen asked why so young - because the story says it works best before the girls are sexually active.

This disease kills 100 Scottish women a year and the vaccination will help prevent this death toll. Whoever the parents who "forced ministers" to stop the programme are, if they really exist, they should be ashamed.

4

McMicrogal,

07/01/2007 10:50:01

Oh for goodness sake! People are clearly more worried about what the neighbours think than the health of their daughters. Just because they are vaccinated does not mean they are doing the deed. Our bodies take time to build up antibodies, leave it until they are 16 and they may well have aready been exposed, or will be exposed too soon after vaccination for it to have made any difference.

5

HA,

07/01/2007 15:41:06

Could this be the executive blaming "the parents" so they don't have to fork out the dosh?

6

Arthur,

07/01/2007 17:27:11

Luddites, again. The churches would rather have women die young, faithfull, and virginal than live longer happier, less stressed lives because they would have reduced their chances of contracting another terminal disease.
I would like to kinw which parents and how many have
condemned 70 women a year to death.

7

HPVCancerVictim,

USA 07/01/2007 22:46:07

HPV infections also cause up to 25% of all head & neck cancers. Males and females are equally affected. All it takes is one "sloppy kiss" with someone who is already infected. That's not the traditional definition of "STD", is it? I want to protect all children from HPV strains that cause cancer and warts (which can appear on any skin - not just sexual oragans). Merck needs to change their marketing to cover these other "non-STD" infections! That will help all of us live healthier lives!

8

hughie 2,

07/01/2007 22:53:06

I do belive #5 has hit the mark and all other comments are also right .
as for #1 I know of girls coming through the hopital age 11 ready do have a child.
Edinburgh should be proud to know that this vaccine was another invention by a Scottish proffessor Ian Fraser, though he did his reseach in Brisbane Austrlia because of better social ecconomic conditions and better weather.
but he is still a Scot. be pprouud and use it to safe lives,,

Please dont play politics or religion..

9

starviego,

08/01/2007 04:18:03

God gave us an immune system. Put your trust in Him, not the prideful, flawed works of man. Vaccines are wrong for several reasons:

--they contain high levels of mercury, a toxic heavy metal which the body cannot easily expel. This results in autism in toddlers and also causes brain damage and other ill effects to the rest of us. The ever escalating number of 'necessary' vaccines is having cumulative effects, slowly poisoning the immune system.

--there are side effects with every vaccine, sometimes worse than the disease itself. Numerous vaccines are known to actually cause the disease they are designed to prevent, in a small proportion of people. Other side effects are encephalitis, paralysis and death.

--Of course people will die of cervical cancer. We all must die of something. What is the average age of those who die each year of cervical cancer? Of course they want you to believe that all these cancer victims are being cut down in the prime of life, but cancer is largely a disease of the aged, and I suspect it is the same with cervical cancer.


Still want to vaccinate your daughter? Go ahead, just don't be surprised if she turns out to be uanble to bear children, or these girls give birth to children with birth defects, or to children who will themselves show a disposition to get cancer at an early age.

10

billyboyfl,

fl 08/01/2007 04:49:28

i'm with starviego
it seems common sense not to mess with ones immune system. my understanding is that better sanitary conditions have more to do with modern mans relative freedom from disease than vaccines. also, vaccinating a child against an STD is just repulsive to me.

11

jane123,

08/01/2007 08:07:35

I don't remember wanting to rush out and get pregnant after I was vaccinated against rubella at the age of 12.

12

maestra,

08/01/2007 08:20:18

Yup, I am not in favour of vaccines, except in very unusual circumstances - I think they make LOTS of money for drug companies.

The US wants to vaccinate us against chicken pox...

13

Arthur,

08/01/2007 08:34:47

9) Yep here we see the luddite lunatic hell fire and brimstone brigade at it ignorant best. Mercury in vaccines may have been an issue some time ago it is now a controlled substance, if you believe it is still a danger kindly cite your proof.
Your non existent deity supposedly gave us an immune system, he also presented us with the tre of the knowledge of life, and diseases. He knew his flawed
creation would eat of the tree, because according to you he also gave us free will, were this not the case
we would still be sitting in caves worshipping the sun and have a life expectancy of 30.
If vaccination had not been discovered and innoculations developed we would still have smallpox, measles. rubella, and a host of other killer diseases.

14

kdowling,

manchester 08/01/2007 10:11:29

I cannot believe that any responsible parent would vaccinate their children against mumps rubella ect,but not against cervical cancer.This disease kills thousands of women each year and many more have to undergo intense and radical treatment, to try to rid them of this dreadful disease.It kills women of all ages even in their twenties.
Parents should seek the facts about this cancer before denying their children it.

15

isthatso,

08/01/2007 14:33:40

Why bother to ask questions ? Just take the shots and trust in the benevolent pharmaceutical industry. Their motives are entirely altruistic I am sure. It's unthinkable to even suggest they might be making bundles of money on such a program. Questions take too much time and who really wants to know what they inject,as medicine, into their children ?

16

newfylady,

08/01/2007 16:01:58

I just feel so sad at these attitudes we are going back to the dark ages. Cervical cancer is not caused by promiscuity, everyone who has sexual realtions gets the virus it just depends on your immune system and my daughters did not deal with it she died last year at the age of 34 leaving a devastated family. I know that if this injection had been about when she was little I would have been banging on the door for her to have it. Please all mum's and dad's think very carefully before refusing this injection I certainly don't want to see another mother go through the agonies I have. If you also knew some of the treatments these women go through to try and get rid of this horrible cancer then you wouldn't hesitate at protecting your daughters.

17

Territimmons,

08/01/2007 16:05:37

I do have a big problem with young girls being used as gineau pigs by pharmaceutical companies. Why is it that before this vaccine came out, public education on HPV and cervical cancer was almost non-existent. The medical community and sex educators kept sexually active people completely in the dark about HPV because there was no evidence that condoms could protect against HPV. So, the medical community and sex educators in all of their wisdom decided not to start an awareness campaign about HPV because they though it might undermine their "Just use a condom" solution to STDs. The fact that a hundred women die of cervical cancer every year meant nothing. Now that there is a supposed vaccine (which is only 70% effective, mind you), the time and money being spent educating people about cervical cancer is ridiculous. Parents have every right to be skeptical about this vaccine. I, for one, would not give it to my daughter unless I was absolutley sure it is safe and it does what it is supposed to do. Remember DES? Remember HRT? These were all wonder treatments developed and heavily pushed by the medical community on women until it turned out they both cause cancer, etc. Now, they are trying the same approach to coerce parents to accept this vaccine for their daughter.

18

memyselfandi,

08/01/2007 19:59:53

I think its a matter of trust that influenced there decision to decline the shots.with all the controversies about shots given to our children how can you trust them? I had the measles and the mumps and chicken pocks. So did all the kids when i was growing up and i never heard of anyone dieing from them.I agree with those who say NO. I refused immunizations for my son and do not regret it.Even when the schools sent me threats I just laughed knowing they were empty threats.Some how people think we are all going to die if we don't let them inject our kids.Ummmm we havnt died off in the last thousands of years from these childhood diseases and i doubt that THESE will be the down fall of man.But the atheists of course will swear by this one so they can have sex with whatever they want lmao.

19

memyselfandi,

08/01/2007 20:43:50

I think its a matter of trust that influenced there decision to decline the shots.with all the controversies about shots given to our children how can you trust them? I had the measles and the mumps and chicken pocks. So did all the kids when i was growing up and i never heard of anyone dieing from them.I agree with those who say NO. I refused immunizations for my son and do not regret it.Even when the schools sent me threats I just laughed knowing they were empty threats.Some how people think we are all going to die if we don't let them inject our kids.Ummmm we havnt died off in the last thousands of years from these childhood diseases and i doubt that THESE will be the down fall of man.But the atheists of course will swear by this one so they can have sex with whatever they want lmao.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.