On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:37:21 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>Janet B wrote:
>>
>> All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>
>Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>
>IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens. They are almost
>adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>vaccine until they do start having sex.
>
>It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either. How
>did we ever survive without this new drug.
>
>IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
>vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
>for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
>
>I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
>decide.

Golly. You just don't know much about this do you? Yes, I read all
the fact sheets. Yes, I read all about new vaccines, virus, etc. You
need to go back and get some more info.
Janet US

Janet B wrote:
>
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:00:23 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
> >barbie gee wrote:
> >>
> >> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone with
> >> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
> >> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
> >
> >I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
> >not?
>
> Have you? Why not?
> Janet US

No, I haven't gotten one and I don't care about one.
I'm good and no one needs to pick on Julie about it either.

On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 11:40:06 AM UTC-4, barbie gee wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016, Julie Bove wrote:

> > The vaccine can cause paralysis. Not a chance I'm willing to take.
> >
>
> citation, and frequency of this adverse affect per total number of those
> vaccinated, please.

I doubt Julie will oblige. Here's some info from
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4055804/>

In a safety study in general population from Denmark and Sweden with
vaccinated 997,585 girls aged 10-17, the rate ratios for 20 of 23
autoimmune events were not significantly increased. The rate ratios for
five neurological events were not significantly increased and there were
inverse associations with epilepsy and paralysis.

So there was less paralysis among girls who received the HPV vaccine, not
more.

Cindy Hamilton

On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:53:31 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>Janet wrote:
>>
>> The HPV vaccine is part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme and
>> is routinely offered to secondary school girls aged 12 and 13.
>> It's a safe vaccine and...
>
>I'll bet you never got one and YOU are still alive. Who are you to
>talk?
>
>Don't pick on Julie for this. If anything, it should be Angela's
>decision and her's alone. She's old enough to decide.

Do you know why the Janet's have not gotten this vaccine? Thought
not. You better read up on it. BTW, no one is picking on Julie for
this. We are pointing out her 'facts' are not facts.
Again. You need to do some reading from some real sources, not scare
sources or blogs. You are a skeptic, that's good. But before you
form a solid opinion or give advice, you need to be fully informed.
Janet US

Janet B wrote:
>
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:37:21 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
> >Janet B wrote:
> >>
> >> All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
> >> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
> >
> >Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
> >from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
> >more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
> >
> >IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens. They are almost
> >adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
> >course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
> >vaccine until they do start having sex.
> >
> >It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
> >never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either. How
> >did we ever survive without this new drug.
> >
> >IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
> >vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
> >for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
> >
> >I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
> >decide.
>
> Golly. You just don't know much about this do you? Yes, I read all
> the fact sheets. Yes, I read all about new vaccines, virus, etc. You
> need to go back and get some more info.

I'll bet you run out for the newest flu shot every year too, don't
you?
Don't be a lemming run off the cliff into the sea. Use your head.

On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 12:59:45 PM UTC-4, Gary wrote:
> barbie gee wrote:
> >
> > and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone with
> > cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
> > exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
>
> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
> not?

I can't speak for Barbie Gee, but I haven't gotten it BECAUSE IT DIDN'T
EXIST UNTIL AFTER I BECAME SEXUALLY ACTIVE. No point locking the barn
door after the horse is stolen.

Sorry for shouting. Some things just seem so painfully self-evident
that I fly right off the handle.

Cindy Hamilton

Janet B wrote:
> BTW, no one is picking on Julie for
> this. We are pointing out her 'facts' are not facts.

No..You are definitely Julie bashing here. Get real. You don't know
any facts any more than she does. It's all a fairly new vaccine and
theory at this point. Again though, her daughter is old enough to
decide for herself and that's none of your concern.

You don't need the vaccine because you don't "get any" anymore. Take
that, smarty pants.

Janet B wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:37:21 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>>Janet B wrote:
>>>
>>> All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>>> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>>
>>Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>>from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>>more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>>
>>IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens. They are almost
>>adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>>course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>>vaccine until they do start having sex.
>>
>>It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>>never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either. How
>>did we ever survive without this new drug.
>>
>>IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
>>vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
>>for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
>>
>>I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
>>decide.
>
> Golly. You just don't know much about this do you? Yes, I read all
> the fact sheets. Yes, I read all about new vaccines, virus, etc. You
> need to go back and get some more info.
> Janet US

sometimes evidence doesn't matter

it's like the joke about the farmer who goes to the zoo and sees a
giraffe

"no such animal" he says

On 01/06/2016 11:19 AM, Gary wrote:
> Janet B wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:00:23 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>
>>> barbie gee wrote:
>>>>
>>>> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone with
>>>> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
>>>> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
>>>
>>> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
>>> not?
>>
>> Have you? Why not?
>> Janet US
>
> No, I haven't gotten one and I don't care about one.
> I'm good and no one needs to pick on Julie about it either.
>
We are not picking on her! We are trying to help her see straight!

On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:24:07 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>Janet B wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:37:21 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>
>> >Janet B wrote:
>> >>
>> >> All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>> >> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>> >
>> >Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>> >from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>> >more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>> >
>> >IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens. They are almost
>> >adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>> >course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>> >vaccine until they do start having sex.
>> >
>> >It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>> >never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either. How
>> >did we ever survive without this new drug.
>> >
>> >IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
>> >vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
>> >for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
>> >
>> >I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
>> >decide.
>>
>> Golly. You just don't know much about this do you? Yes, I read all
>> the fact sheets. Yes, I read all about new vaccines, virus, etc. You
>> need to go back and get some more info.
>
>I'll bet you run out for the newest flu shot every year too, don't
>you?
>Don't be a lemming run off the cliff into the sea. Use your head.

There's nothing more to be said. You are paranoid.
Janet us

On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:31:36 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>Janet B wrote:
>> BTW, no one is picking on Julie for
>> this. We are pointing out her 'facts' are not facts.
>
>No..You are definitely Julie bashing here. Get real. You don't know
>any facts any more than she does. It's all a fairly new vaccine and
>theory at this point. Again though, her daughter is old enough to
>decide for herself and that's none of your concern.
>
>You don't need the vaccine because you don't "get any" anymore. Take
>that, smarty pants.

Well, we know for sure that you aren't getting any. I bet you think
even your hand is out to do you harm.
Janet US

On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 11:33:11 AM UTC-6, graham wrote:
> On 01/06/2016 11:19 AM, Gary wrote:
> > Janet B wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:00:23 -0400, Gary > wrote:
> >>
> >>> barbie gee wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone with
> >>>> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
> >>>> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
> >>>
> >>> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
> >>> not?
> >>
> >> Have you? Why not?
> >> Janet US
> >
> > No, I haven't gotten one and I don't care about one.
> > I'm good and no one needs to pick on Julie about it either.
> >
> We are not picking on her! We are trying to help her see straight!

And that in itself is a tough job, as Julie reads/listens to QUACK doctors who apparently give out BAD advice.

In article >, says...
>
> Janet B wrote:
> >
> > All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
> > effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>
> Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
> from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
> more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>
> IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens.

Most 12 yr olds have no concept of their own vulnerability to the
commonest STD in USA; and you can hardly expect them to grasp it might
kill them in one of several particularly horrible ways. Kids might
"know" that people die from smoking, drugs, alcohol; but they are so
sure it won't happen to them they do that stuff anyway.


They are almost
> adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
> course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
> vaccine until they do start having sex.

You miss the point. Young teens might not be having penetrative
intercourse, but they may be open-mouth kissing and mutually
masturbating, and HPV can be transmitted by both.
>
> It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
> never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either.

Maybe you both have HPV.

http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv.htm

"HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI). HPV is
so common that nearly all sexually active men and women get it at some
point in their lives."

Janet.

On 6/1/2016 12:00 PM, Gary wrote:
> barbie gee wrote:
>>
>> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone with
>> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
>> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
>
> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
> not?
>

The vaccine is not usually valid for any person older than 26 (IF even
that old these days!) because most folks older than that have already
been exposed. DUH! Rare is it to find a virgin who's 26 (male or female!)!

Sky

================================
Kitchen Rule #1 - Use the timer!
Kitchen Rule #2 - Cook's choice!
================================

On 01/06/2016 11:50 AM, Janet wrote:

>
> "HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI). HPV is
> so common that nearly all sexually active men and women get it at some
> point in their lives."
>
> Janet.
>
I've often wondered whether there is a link between HPV and prostate
cancer but I think this has been denied.
Graham

Janet B wrote:
>
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:31:36 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
> >Janet B wrote:
> >> BTW, no one is picking on Julie for
> >> this. We are pointing out her 'facts' are not facts.
> >
> >No..You are definitely Julie bashing here. Get real. You don't know
> >any facts any more than she does. It's all a fairly new vaccine and
> >theory at this point. Again though, her daughter is old enough to
> >decide for herself and that's none of your concern.
> >
> >You don't need the vaccine because you don't "get any" anymore. Take
> >that, smarty pants.
>
> Well, we know for sure that you aren't getting any.

Fact! I haven't "done it" in years and I don't care. Been there, done
that. Getting some comes with consequences and I'm over all those
girlie head games.

> I bet you think
> even your hand is out to do you harm.

Mrs Palm and her 5 daughters are safe, AFAIK. No vaccination necessary
and no risk of disease or pregnancy. It's a win-win solution here. I
DON'T CARE! I lost my little furry one and nothing matters anymore to
me. I've said that before. Believe it. I'm so over losses. Don't think
that's a sad thing. It's a reality.

:-D

Janet wrote:
>
> In article >, says...
> >
> > Janet B wrote:
> > >
> > > All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
> > > effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
> >
> > Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
> > from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
> > more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
> >
> > IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens.
>
> Most 12 yr olds have no concept of their own vulnerability to the
> commonest STD in USA; and you can hardly expect them to grasp it might
> kill them in one of several particularly horrible ways. Kids might
> "know" that people die from smoking, drugs, alcohol; but they are so
> sure it won't happen to them they do that stuff anyway.
>
> They are almost
> > adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
> > course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
> > vaccine until they do start having sex.
>
> You miss the point. Young teens might not be having penetrative
> intercourse, but they may be open-mouth kissing and mutually
> masturbating, and HPV can be transmitted by both.
> >
> > It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
> > never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either.
>
> Maybe you both have HPV.
>
> http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv.htm
>
> "HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI). HPV is
> so common that nearly all sexually active men and women get it at some
> point in their lives."
>
> Janet.

Do you have it, Janet? Have you been vaccinated?

On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:53:31 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>Janet wrote:
>>
>> The HPV vaccine is part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme and
>> is routinely offered to secondary school girls aged 12 and 13.
>> It's a safe vaccine and...
>
>I'll bet you never got one and YOU are still alive. Who are you to
>talk?
>
>Don't pick on Julie for this. If anything, it should be Angela's
>decision and her's alone. She's old enough to decide.

Except teens all know they are invincible, until something happens.

On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:24:07 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>Janet B wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:37:21 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>
>> >Janet B wrote:
>> >>
>> >> All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>> >> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>> >
>> >Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>> >from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>> >more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>> >
>> >IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens. They are almost
>> >adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>> >course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>> >vaccine until they do start having sex.
>> >
>> >It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>> >never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either. How
>> >did we ever survive without this new drug.
>> >
>> >IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
>> >vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
>> >for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
>> >
>> >I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
>> >decide.
>>
>> Golly. You just don't know much about this do you? Yes, I read all
>> the fact sheets. Yes, I read all about new vaccines, virus, etc. You
>> need to go back and get some more info.
>
>I'll bet you run out for the newest flu shot every year too, don't
>you?
>Don't be a lemming run off the cliff into the sea. Use your head.

I have a flu shot every year because I had Swine Flu back in the 70s
and never want a major flu again, however I've had the shot and never
had flu since!

On 6/1/2016 12:31 PM, Gary wrote:
> Janet B wrote:
>> BTW, no one is picking on Julie for
>> this. We are pointing out her 'facts' are not facts.
>
> No..You are definitely Julie bashing here. Get real. You don't know
> any facts any more than she does. It's all a fairly new vaccine and
> theory at this point. Again though, her daughter is old enough to
> decide for herself and that's none of your concern.
>
> You don't need the vaccine because you don't "get any" anymore. Take
> that, smarty pants.
>

My guess is Gary is a lot older than twenty-six. The HPV vaccine is not
recommended for "older" folks since they're most likely already exposed.

http://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/vaccine.html

Bove seems to rely on anecdotal stories/links of paralysis to make
bove's 'scare point(s)' -- oh, and any other point bove tries to make,
too, with irrelevant links. Bove assumes the stories are 'scientific
evidence.' By the time any male or female 'child' becomes an adult at
the age of 18, it's usually way too late to 'educate' them. They've
most likely been sexually active already (smell the roses!!!!) by that
age. Get real . . . .

Sky

================================
Kitchen Rule #1 - Use the timer!
Kitchen Rule #2 - Cook's choice!
================================

wrote:
>
> Gary wrote:
> >Don't pick on Julie for this. If anything, it should be Angela's
> >decision and her's alone. She's old enough to decide.
>
> Except teens all know they are invincible, until something happens.

Finally...a valid comment. At this point, Julie could advise but it's
still up to her daughter to decide for herself. She's old enough to do
the research herself.

Very sadly, I've recently learned that I have "extended deceased
ferret syndrome." No one ever warned me of this. No known vaccine
either, that I've heard of. I'm still waiting for "time to heal."

Sky wrote:
>
> My guess is Gary is a lot older than twenty-six.

LOL! Good guess, Sky. You win. :-D

On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 7:33:11 AM UTC-10, graham wrote:
> On 01/06/2016 11:19 AM, Gary wrote:
> > Janet B wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:00:23 -0400, Gary > wrote:
> >>
> >>> barbie gee wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone with
> >>>> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
> >>>> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
> >>>
> >>> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
> >>> not?
> >>
> >> Have you? Why not?
> >> Janet US
> >
> > No, I haven't gotten one and I don't care about one.
> > I'm good and no one needs to pick on Julie about it either.
> >
> We are not picking on her! We are trying to help her see straight!

You might want to start with yourself first. By "you" and "yourself", I don't mean you you, I mean people that feel the need to help other people see straight.

On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 14:19:32 -0400, Gary > wrote:

wrote:
>>
>> Gary wrote:
>> >Don't pick on Julie for this. If anything, it should be Angela's
>> >decision and her's alone. She's old enough to decide.
>>
>> Except teens all know they are invincible, until something happens.
>
>Finally...a valid comment. At this point, Julie could advise but it's
>still up to her daughter to decide for herself. She's old enough to do
>the research herself.
>
>Very sadly, I've recently learned that I have "extended deceased
>ferret syndrome." No one ever warned me of this. No known vaccine
>either, that I've heard of. I'm still waiting for "time to heal."


I think you're maybe a classic case of 'time to honour Mia by finding
another ferret who can benefit as she did' ??

Gary > wrote:
> Janet B wrote:
>>
>> All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>
> Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
> from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
> more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>
> IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens. They are almost
> adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
> course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
> vaccine until they do start having sex.
>
> It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
> never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either. How
> did we ever survive without this new drug.
>
> IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
> vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
> for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
>
> I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
> decide.
>

The problem is this. How many teens do you know that make healthy
decisions about sexuality? The vaccine is given as a course of 3 doses,
given over a 6 month timeframe. No teenager is going to make a
conscientious decision to become sexually active, THEN go get the shot then
wait half a year to act. Not gonna happen. And once you start having sex,
it's almost pointless to then get the vaccine as you've already been
exposed (and will keep getting exposed) to HPV. Whether exposure is to one
of the strains that causes cancer or not is like playing Russian roulette.
That is why the recommended age to get the vaccine is right around the age
of 11-12. Is this really a decision an 11-12 year old could or should be
making? You may think this vaccine isn't necessary, but if you knew even
one woman with cervical cancer from HPV (and they now say all cervical
cancer is caused by HPV) you may think otherwise. Of course you survived
without it. You don't have a cervix.

--
jinx the minx

On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 14:07:39 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>Janet wrote:
>>
>> In article >, says...
>> >
>> > Janet B wrote:
>> > >
>> > > All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>> > > effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>> >
>> > Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>> > from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>> > more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>> >
>> > IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens.
>>
>> Most 12 yr olds have no concept of their own vulnerability to the
>> commonest STD in USA; and you can hardly expect them to grasp it might
>> kill them in one of several particularly horrible ways. Kids might
>> "know" that people die from smoking, drugs, alcohol; but they are so
>> sure it won't happen to them they do that stuff anyway.
>>
>> They are almost
>> > adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>> > course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>> > vaccine until they do start having sex.
>>
>> You miss the point. Young teens might not be having penetrative
>> intercourse, but they may be open-mouth kissing and mutually
>> masturbating, and HPV can be transmitted by both.
>> >
>> > It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>> > never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either.
>>
>> Maybe you both have HPV.
>>
>> http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv.htm
>>
>> "HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI). HPV is
>> so common that nearly all sexually active men and women get it at some
>> point in their lives."
>>
>> Janet.
>
>Do you have it, Janet? Have you been vaccinated?

Please, please go and read up on this so you don't embarrass yourself
further.
Janet US

In article >, says...
>
> Janet wrote:
> >
> > The HPV vaccine is part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme and
> > is routinely offered to secondary school girls aged 12 and 13.
> > It's a safe vaccine and...
>
> I'll bet you never got one and YOU are still alive.


Who are you to
> talk?

I'm a longterm cancer survivor who lost her cervix and uterus at age
36.

I had an annual cervical smear test from age 18 and I bet most of the
women in this group have done the same. If HPV vaccination had been
available back then I'd have had it.

Janet UK

On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:24:18 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 7:33:11 AM UTC-10, graham wrote:
>> On 01/06/2016 11:19 AM, Gary wrote:
>> > Janet B wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:00:23 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> barbie gee wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone with
>> >>>> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
>> >>>> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
>> >>> not?
>> >>
>> >> Have you? Why not?
>> >> Janet US
>> >
>> > No, I haven't gotten one and I don't care about one.
>> > I'm good and no one needs to pick on Julie about it either.
>> >
>> We are not picking on her! We are trying to help her see straight!
>
>You might want to start with yourself first. By "you" and "yourself", I don't mean you you, I mean people that feel the need to help other people see straight.

Ahhh. No falsities should ever be challenged in this group lest a
discussion breaks out. O.k., got it.
Janet US

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> wrote:
>>
>> Gary wrote:
>> >Don't pick on Julie for this. If anything, it should be Angela's
>> >decision and her's alone. She's old enough to decide.
>>
>> Except teens all know they are invincible, until something happens.
>
> Finally...a valid comment. At this point, Julie could advise but it's
> still up to her daughter to decide for herself. She's old enough to do
> the research herself.
>
> Very sadly, I've recently learned that I have "extended deceased
> ferret syndrome." No one ever warned me of this. No known vaccine
> either, that I've heard of. I'm still waiting for "time to heal."

So long as you *are* aware, it will take time ...


--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

Gary > wrote:
> Janet B wrote:
>> BTW, no one is picking on Julie for
>> this. We are pointing out her 'facts' are not facts.
>
> No..You are definitely Julie bashing here. Get real. You don't know
> any facts any more than she does. It's all a fairly new vaccine and
> theory at this point. Again though, her daughter is old enough to
> decide for herself and that's none of your concern.
>
> You don't need the vaccine because you don't "get any" anymore. Take
> that, smarty pants.
>

I'm not entirely sure you understand how HPV exposure and cervical cancer
works?? More specifically, what the shot even does? Do you also think no
one needs the polio vaccine because no one gets polio anymore??!!

--
jinx the minx

Janet B > wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:24:07 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>> Janet B wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:37:21 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Janet B wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>>>>> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>>>>
>>>> Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>>>> from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>>>> more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>>>>
>>>> IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens. They are almost
>>>> adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>>>> course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>>>> vaccine until they do start having sex.
>>>>
>>>> It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>>>> never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either. How
>>>> did we ever survive without this new drug.
>>>>
>>>> IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
>>>> vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
>>>> for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
>>>>
>>>> I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
>>>> decide.
>>>
>>> Golly. You just don't know much about this do you? Yes, I read all
>>> the fact sheets. Yes, I read all about new vaccines, virus, etc. You
>>> need to go back and get some more info.
>>
>> I'll bet you run out for the newest flu shot every year too, don't
>> you?
>> Don't be a lemming run off the cliff into the sea. Use your head.
>
> There's nothing more to be said. You are paranoid.
> Janet us
>

And ignorant.

--
jinx the minx

On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 13:47:52 -0500, jinx the minx >
wrote:

>Gary > wrote:
>> Janet B wrote:
>>> BTW, no one is picking on Julie for
>>> this. We are pointing out her 'facts' are not facts.
>>
>> No..You are definitely Julie bashing here. Get real. You don't know
>> any facts any more than she does. It's all a fairly new vaccine and
>> theory at this point. Again though, her daughter is old enough to
>> decide for herself and that's none of your concern.
>>
>> You don't need the vaccine because you don't "get any" anymore. Take
>> that, smarty pants.
>>
>
>I'm not entirely sure you understand how HPV exposure and cervical cancer
>works?? More specifically, what the shot even does? Do you also think no
>one needs the polio vaccine because no one gets polio anymore??!!

I suspect you are right that he doesn't understand. How's this?
Do most people who are sexually active get exposed to HPV? Yes
Do most people who have HPV know that they have it? No
Are some people more at risk with an HPV infection? Yes
Do the results of an HPV infection show up immediately? Yes and No
Can the results of an HPV infection show up years later? Yes

Janet US

In article >, says...
>
> Janet wrote:
> >
> > In article >, says...
> > >
> > > Janet B wrote:
> > > >
> > > > All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
> > > > effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
> > >
> > > Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
> > > from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
> > > more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
> > >
> > > IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens.
> >
> > Most 12 yr olds have no concept of their own vulnerability to the
> > commonest STD in USA; and you can hardly expect them to grasp it might
> > kill them in one of several particularly horrible ways. Kids might
> > "know" that people die from smoking, drugs, alcohol; but they are so
> > sure it won't happen to them they do that stuff anyway.
> >
> > They are almost
> > > adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
> > > course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
> > > vaccine until they do start having sex.
> >
> > You miss the point. Young teens might not be having penetrative
> > intercourse, but they may be open-mouth kissing and mutually
> > masturbating, and HPV can be transmitted by both.
> > >
> > > It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
> > > never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either.
> >
> > Maybe you both have HPV.
> >
> > http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv.htm
> >
> > "HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI). HPV is
> > so common that nearly all sexually active men and women get it at some
> > point in their lives."
> >
> > Janet.
>
> Do you have it, Janet?

Given the statistics of HPV prevalence I've probably had it, decades
before vaccination was available.

> Have you been vaccinated?

Of course not, stupid.

Janet UK

On 2016-06-01 1:49 PM, Roy wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 11:33:11 AM UTC-6, graham wrote:
>> On 01/06/2016 11:19 AM, Gary wrote:
>>> Janet B wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:00:23 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> barbie gee wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone with
>>>>>> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
>>>>>> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
>>>>> not?
>>>>
>>>> Have you? Why not?
>>>> Janet US
>>>
>>> No, I haven't gotten one and I don't care about one.
>>> I'm good and no one needs to pick on Julie about it either.
>>>
>> We are not picking on her! We are trying to help her see straight!
>
> And that in itself is a tough job, as Julie reads/listens to QUACK doctors who apparently give out BAD advice.
>


I am not sure if it is extremely sad or extremely amusing that she
rejects every piece of valid advice and information here but is a sponge
for nonsense factoids.

On 6/1/2016 8:36 AM, Janet B wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:24:18 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 7:33:11 AM UTC-10, graham wrote:
>>> On 01/06/2016 11:19 AM, Gary wrote:
>>>> Janet B wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:00:23 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> barbie gee wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone with
>>>>>>> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
>>>>>>> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
>>>>>> not?
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you? Why not?
>>>>> Janet US
>>>>
>>>> No, I haven't gotten one and I don't care about one.
>>>> I'm good and no one needs to pick on Julie about it either.
>>>>
>>> We are not picking on her! We are trying to help her see straight!
>>
>> You might want to start with yourself first. By "you" and "yourself", I don't mean you you, I mean people that feel the need to help other people see straight.
>
> Ahhh. No falsities should ever be challenged in this group lest a
> discussion breaks out. O.k., got it.
> Janet US
>

"interaction" might be more apt than "discussion." What goes on here is
the kind of "discussions" that commonly takes place in grade-school
schoolyards. Oh, and don't forget "badgering" and "hassling" too.
There's not much chance of real discussion breaking out here. I'm ever
hopeful though.

"dsi1" > wrote in message ...
> On 6/1/2016 8:36 AM, Janet B wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:24:18 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 7:33:11 AM UTC-10, graham wrote:
>>>> On 01/06/2016 11:19 AM, Gary wrote:
>>>>> Janet B wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:00:23 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> barbie gee wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from
>>>>>>>> HPV
>>>>>>>> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
>>>>>>> not?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you? Why not?
>>>>>> Janet US
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I haven't gotten one and I don't care about one.
>>>>> I'm good and no one needs to pick on Julie about it either.
>>>>>
>>>> We are not picking on her! We are trying to help her see straight!
>>>
>>> You might want to start with yourself first. By "you" and "yourself", I
>>> don't mean you you, I mean people that feel the need to help other
>>> people see straight.
>>
>> Ahhh. No falsities should ever be challenged in this group lest a
>> discussion breaks out. O.k., got it.
>> Janet US
>>
>
> "interaction" might be more apt than "discussion." What goes on here is
> the kind of "discussions" that commonly takes place in grade-school
> schoolyards. Oh, and don't forget "badgering" and "hassling" too. There's
> not much chance of real discussion breaking out here. I'm ever hopeful
> though.

+1

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 14:09:16 +0100, Janet > wrote:

> In article >, says...
> >
> >
> > Wrong. If it were that important, then it would be added to the lists of
> > required shots. It's not.
>
> It is, in UK
>
> http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccina...ges/hpv-human-
> papillomavirus-vaccine.aspx
>
> "All girls aged 12 to 13 are offered HPV (human papilloma virus)
> vaccination as part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme. The
> vaccine protects against cervical cancer. It's usually given to girls in
> year eight at schools in England.
>
> According to Cancer Research UK, cervical cancer is the second
> mostcommon cancer in women under the age of 35.
> Which girls should have the HPV vaccination?
>
> The HPV vaccine is part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme and
> is routinely offered to secondary school girls aged 12 and 13.
> It's a safe vaccine and there are very few girls who aren't suitable for
> HPV vaccination. However, special precautions may need to be taken for
> girls with certain health conditio

ns, or who have ever had a severe
> allergic reaction (anaphylaxis).
>
> Read more about who should have the HPV vaccine."
> HPV vaccine safety
>
> http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vaccina...cine-cervarix-
> gardasil-safety.aspx
>
>
> janet UK

A HMO called Kaiser Permanente (which operates in California;
Colorado; Georgia; Hawaii; Maryland; Oregon; Virginia; Washington;
Washington D.C.) has it on their list too. I texted my DIL to see if
my 14 YO grandson had gotten it yet and she says he did.

http://kff.org/womens-health-policy/...ss-and-use-in/

According to that document

The federal Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
recommends that all girls and boys get vaccinated at age 11 or 12, and
that girls and women ages 13-26 and boys and men ages 13-21 be given a
“catch-up” vaccination. The vaccine is recommended for use in men
ages 22-26 if they have not been previously vaccinated, are
immunocompromised, or engage in sexual activity with other men. ACIP
recommended the vaccine for females in 2006 and added the
recommendation for males in 2011. ACIP recommended the new HPV vaccine
in February 2015 for females ages 9-26 and boys ages 9-15. Off label
use for the new vaccine for males ages 16-21 is allowed, and a
recommendation for this age group is expected to follow in the coming
years.

I don't know if Julie expects a social worker to knock on her door and
tell her to vaccinate her child or what. Apparently an easy way to
prevent certain forms of cancer isn't of any concern.

--

sf

On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 11:42:21 -0600, Janet B >
wrote:

> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:24:07 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
> >Janet B wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:37:21 -0400, Gary > wrote:
> >>
> >
> >I'll bet you run out for the newest flu shot every year too, don't
> >you?
> >Don't be a lemming run off the cliff into the sea. Use your head.
>
> There's nothing more to be said. You are paranoid.
>
That's for sure.

--

sf

On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 15:24:47 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> I am not sure if it is extremely sad or extremely amusing that she
> rejects every piece of valid advice and information here but is a sponge
> for nonsense factoids.

It's not amusing to see such an easy cancer (genital warts etc)
prevention being summarily dismissed like that.

--

sf

On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 10:24:51 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 12:59:45 PM UTC-4, Gary wrote:
> > barbie gee wrote:
> > >
> > > and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone with
> > > cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
> > > exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
> >
> > I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
> > not?
>
> I can't speak for Barbie Gee, but I haven't gotten it BECAUSE IT DIDN'T
> EXIST UNTIL AFTER I BECAME SEXUALLY ACTIVE. No point locking the barn
> door after the horse is stolen.
>
> Sorry for shouting. Some things just seem so painfully self-evident
> that I fly right off the handle.
>

You said what the rest of us were thinking.

--

sf