Chicago Tribune Editorial - A cancer vaccine triumph
Chicago Tribune Editorial - A cancer vaccine triumph
Copyright © 2006, Chicago Tribune
Published July 4, 2006
There's terrific news in the war against HPV, a sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer: A new and potent vaccine is now available. It's highly effective against two strains of human papillomavirus, which are responsible for 70 percent of cervical cancer cases. Last week, an influential government advisory committee recommended the routine vaccination of 11- and 12-year-old girls. Shots can be started as young as 9; women 13 to 26 also should get vaccinated, the panel said.
In announcing the decision, Dr. Anne Schuchat, director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, used words like "historic" and "breakthrough." Yes, it's a formidable weapon against a disease that kills about 240,000 women worldwide, including some 3,700 deaths in the U.S.
Those recommendations will--and should--strongly influence not only insurance coverage, but also decisions by state and local officials about whether to require such vaccinations for schoolchildren. Some large insurance carriers have already announced they'll cover the shots--a welcome development because the vaccine costs $360 for a three-shot regimen.
Now, should Illinois require the vaccination for school kids?
That question, unfortunately, has become tangled in the incendiary debate over abstinence and sex education. Some have expressed fears that an HPV vaccine might encourage promiscuity. They don't want kids to get the message that a shot would make it safe to have sex and render them invulnerable to STDs.
That concern seems overwrought. Kids will still face the risk of an unwanted pregnancy and the risk of other sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV. They will heed those risks or they won't; protection from the relatively low-profile HPV seems unlikely to change behavior.
Right now, it's too early to say the new vaccine should be added to the mandatory list for Illinois schoolchildren. It's wise to allow some time here to track the vaccine in a wider population and over a longer term, to make sure it's as safe and effective as researchers believe.
Ultimately, mandatory inoculation may not be necessary if enough people are voluntarily immunized. That means pediatricians and public health officials need to start educating parents about the risks and benefits.
It's hard to imagine that parents wouldn't want children to get this shot. At the same time, parents can take the opportunity when a child is immunized to talk about sexual health and risks. They can tell kids that having sex at a young age is a terrible idea, an unhealthy idea, with or without a vaccine. It's not just about the possibilities of disease, but about emotional maturity and other considerations.
But please, let's remember, this is a cancer vaccine. It's not a surrogate for the abstinence debate. Everyone is best served if this public discussion is about the safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the new vaccine--and that's all.
Copyright © 2006, Chicago Tribune
Published July 4, 2006
There's terrific news in the war against HPV, a sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer: A new and potent vaccine is now available. It's highly effective against two strains of human papillomavirus, which are responsible for 70 percent of cervical cancer cases. Last week, an influential government advisory committee recommended the routine vaccination of 11- and 12-year-old girls. Shots can be started as young as 9; women 13 to 26 also should get vaccinated, the panel said.
In announcing the decision, Dr. Anne Schuchat, director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, used words like "historic" and "breakthrough." Yes, it's a formidable weapon against a disease that kills about 240,000 women worldwide, including some 3,700 deaths in the U.S.
Those recommendations will--and should--strongly influence not only insurance coverage, but also decisions by state and local officials about whether to require such vaccinations for schoolchildren. Some large insurance carriers have already announced they'll cover the shots--a welcome development because the vaccine costs $360 for a three-shot regimen.
Now, should Illinois require the vaccination for school kids?
That question, unfortunately, has become tangled in the incendiary debate over abstinence and sex education. Some have expressed fears that an HPV vaccine might encourage promiscuity. They don't want kids to get the message that a shot would make it safe to have sex and render them invulnerable to STDs.
That concern seems overwrought. Kids will still face the risk of an unwanted pregnancy and the risk of other sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV. They will heed those risks or they won't; protection from the relatively low-profile HPV seems unlikely to change behavior.
Right now, it's too early to say the new vaccine should be added to the mandatory list for Illinois schoolchildren. It's wise to allow some time here to track the vaccine in a wider population and over a longer term, to make sure it's as safe and effective as researchers believe.
Ultimately, mandatory inoculation may not be necessary if enough people are voluntarily immunized. That means pediatricians and public health officials need to start educating parents about the risks and benefits.
It's hard to imagine that parents wouldn't want children to get this shot. At the same time, parents can take the opportunity when a child is immunized to talk about sexual health and risks. They can tell kids that having sex at a young age is a terrible idea, an unhealthy idea, with or without a vaccine. It's not just about the possibilities of disease, but about emotional maturity and other considerations.
But please, let's remember, this is a cancer vaccine. It's not a surrogate for the abstinence debate. Everyone is best served if this public discussion is about the safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the new vaccine--and that's all.
posted by Carlos T Mock at 9:14 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home