A story reported recently on MSNBC, reporting that Merck & Company is lobbying to make an “immunization” against cervical cancer mandatory for girls as young as 11 to 12 years of age passed without raising so much as an eyebrow as to its wisdom. The only hint of controversy came from some conservative parent rights groups because it would, in their opinion, encourage premarital sex.
Let me back up and say this again.
Merck & Company is lobbying to have states pass legislation that would require women as young as 11 or 12 years of age to be “immunized” against a cervical cancer virus with a new drug recently approved by the FDA called Gardasil. At least 18 states are taking this initiative seriously enough to debate it. Michigan has already voted it down. But look at what they’re doing:
A top official from Merck’s vaccine division sits on Women in Government’s business council, and many of the bills around the country have been introduced by members of Women in Government.
“Cervical cancer is of particular interest to our members because it represents the first opportunity that we have to actually eliminate a cancer,” Women in Government President Susan Crosby said.
Talk about an incestuous relationship… if there were a vaccine against these types of cozy alliances, I would be all for it.
This is starting to make something else that bothered me, make sense. A few months ago, a national television ad campaign began that featured several women stating flat out they didn’t know that a virus caused cervical cancer, and you, follow woman viewer, may have it and not even know it. Talk about FEAR mongering, all in the name of keeping you informed.
Let me ask this question: why would anyone tell millions of women that they may have something without knowing, without knowing whether they have it or not? Isn’t this tantamount to shouting “FIRE” in a crowded theater? Why are we so quick to assume that the worst outcome is possible, while being quick to question (or doubt) whether the best outcome is possible?
Merck just shouted “FIRE!” with the aid of these actresses in a national advertising campaign, with the blessings of the FDA and the FTC. The women depicted in the ad weren’t doctors. In fact, they didn’t have to know whether what they were saying was true. They only had to project a FEAR that it may be true.
Now, Merck is taking it to the next level, lobbying to make it mandatory for these very same young women to be vaccinated with their new wonder drug… whether they actually have cervical cancer or not. Of course, since the fear of “C” has been introduced where it didn’t exist before, there will be many who will go along with this charade. Many more will do it because they’re being told to. But in my opinion, this is unconscionable.
Go to their web site, and see the FEAR at work there:
GARDASIL is the only vaccine that may help guard against diseases that are caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) Types 6, 11, 16, and 18:
The operative word in that sentence is may. That keeps things within legal boundaries, but at the same time, it is misleading because of the words only vaccine that preceded it. The inference is that cervical cancer will only respond to a vaccine, when in fact, there are other viable methods of addressing the physiological conditions that make cervical cancer possible.
But even then, there are more disclaimers:
IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT GARDASIL
GARDASIL may not fully protect everyone and does not prevent all types of cervical cancer, so it is important to continue regular cervical cancer screenings.
Anyone who is allergic to the ingredients of GARDASIL should not receive the vaccine. GARDASIL is not for women who are pregnant.
GARDASIL will not treat these diseases and will not protect against diseases caused by other types of HPV.
GARDASIL is given as 3 injections over 6 months and can cause pain, swelling, itching, and redness at the injection site, fever, nausea, and dizziness. Only a doctor or healthcare professional can decide if GARDASIL is right for you or your daughter. Ask about GARDASIL today.
With all these nebulous caveats and conditions, why would anyone agree to make an injection like this mandatory?
The answer is pretty simple. Merck would realize billions in sales if this gimmick is passed. By making it “law,” legislatures would in essence, be usurping the authority of parents; or at least, they would be attempting to. How arrogant. Yet, that’s not how the legislators see it. Listen to this one:
“Not everybody has equal sets of parents,” said (Jessica) Farrar, a Houston Democrat who had precancerous cells removed from her cervix several years ago. “I think this is a public health issue and to not want to eradicate cervical cancer is irresponsible.”
I agree with representative Farrar’s ultimate assessment. However, there are other reasons that contribute to an individual’s susceptibility to an HPV virus thriving within their cell chemistry, including the levels of acidity and toxicity, as well as the mineral sufficiency. Exploring and mitigating these factors should be first tier responses instead of going directly to drugs and giving Merck $200 in this sham of a “game” of Disease Monopoly. But then, Merck is a drug company; in addition, a profit-driven company, and not concerned with the health and well-being of the people who are subjected to its products. How else could a company attempt to influence legislators in 18 states to subject young women to a mandatory injection, given the high degree of legal ass covering that they present with their product information. Clearly, the Gardasil is likely to be either (1) ineffective, or (2) unnecessary. And if there are unintended consequences in states that pass the initiative, they want to have enough room to not be held responsible, by saying that we were informed.
With all the times you hear the words, “ask your doctor” each day, do you really think your doctor, who has probably been wined and dined since medical school by Merck (and other pharmaceutical company’s) salesmen, would tell you to try another strategy before taking their drug?
I didn’t think so.