The legislature seems primed to pass legislation, HB 1061, providing state money to help vaccinate girls against the HPV virus. The overwhelming vote in the House suggests broad based support for this measure. While I remain in support of this bill, in the newest National Review (subscribers only) Kate O'Beirne writes of Texas Governor Rick Perry's executive order to mandate HPV vaccinations. South Dakota is not debating a mandate, but O'Beirne provides information to make one pause and think.
First, "the vaccine doesn’t guard against eleven other high-risk strains of HPV that cause cancer." The vaccine shouldn't be viewed as a "cure" for cervical cancer. Related to this, experts are warning against being too quick to mandate this vaccine:
The American College of Pediatricians opposes requiring the vaccination for school attendance, saying that such a mandate would represent a “serious, precedent-setting action that trespasses on the rights of parents to make medical decisions for their children as well as on the rights of the children to attend school.” The chairman of the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Infectious Diseases, Dr. Joseph A. Bocchini, believes a vaccine mandate is premature. “I think it’s too early,” he said. “This is a new vaccine. It would be wise to wait until we have additional information about the safety of the vaccine.” The Texas Medical Association also opposes the mandate, expressing concerns over liability and costs.
Finally, the sudden interest in the HPV vaccination did not arise spontaneously. It apparently is almost wholly the product of an campaign of the drug's manufacturer, Merck, which stands to make an enormous profit from this vaccine:
The Washington Post recently reported that Virginia and 17 other states are considering the vaccine requirement “at the urging of New Jersey–based pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co. . . . [which] stands to earn hundreds of millions of dollars annually on Gardasil, according to Wall Street estimates.” Public-health organizations have joined Merck in urging that the vaccine be made available in public clinics and encouraging its coverage by private insurers, but they don’t support Merck’s push for a school requirement.
There were 210 cases of cervical cancer in Maryland last year. Democratic state senator Delores Kelley introduced a bill to require the HPV vaccine for sixth-grade girls. Following complaints from parents and recent non-compliance problems with current mandated vaccinations, Kelley has withdrawn her bill (though she has spoken openly of reintroducing it next session). She explains that she was unaware of Merck & Co.’s lobbying efforts, and that she learned about the new HPV vaccine through a nonpartisan group of female legislators called Women in Government. More than half of its listed supporters are pharmaceutical manufacturers or other health-related companies.
O'Beirn characterizes the move to vaccinate against HPV as a case of public interest meeting the profit motive of a large corporation. As she puts it, "There is little controversy over the recommendation that the vaccine be broadly used." HB 1061 is a good bill and not a mandate, but legislators should get all the information before they vote.
In other magazine news, the New Republic is cutting back to a bi-weekly publication rate. It is not clear how that will effect those of us who subscribed to a weekly, not bi-weekly, publication. Are we getting some of our money back?
Recent Comments