AIBU to withdraw consent for hpv vaccine

[Ilovehamabeads]

Signed the forms ages ago for DD to have the HPV vaccine tomorrow. I didn't really read up on it, other than the NHS info leaflet she bought home with the consent form.
Tomorrow is the day she's due to have the first jab. I'm now regretting signing that form so readily, having read more about it. I know in my head that the stories I've read are just the very, very few that went wrong out of millions. But, at the same time I'm thinking what if..
Would it be totally ridiculous to change my mind at the last minute? I think I just need a few people to tell me I'm an idiot for believing the evidence of a few, over the evidence of many!

@ilovehamabeads I hope your dd is ok. My dd has come home with a very sore arm she says, and the needle was “huge”

Tonic, sorry but you’re wrong about age, number of partners and sexual orientation being irrelevant. Each of those factors carry particular risks, which are definitely relevant to how likely it is you will be infected and with which strain of HPV.
Also, piv sex at a young age (low to mid teens) carries more risk of the HPV infection not being cleared and eventually triggering cancers. Iirc it’s not understood exactly why that’s the case.

Mog, one might say a little prick to say her from. Usher pricks???
Sorry, I've a naughty sense of humour. I blame Lord Melbourne.
I've just caught up with what was implied by one MNetter to another about her parents. Disgraceful, and exemplifies the worse bits of MN. Thank goodness there's lots of sensible and informed people here to balance it out. I'm so glad it's been discussed.

Apologies for nonsensical autocorrects . Save and bigger

@ladymelbourne

Lettuce you are missing the point.

Regardless of sex - it is preventable.

Replace cervical cancer with let's say toe nail cancer

Replace number of partners with let's say, number of shoes worn

Replace age with let's say, material of shoes.

Toe nail cancer is preventable by this vaccine.

Yay!!! Hurray for the Toe Nail vaccine! No more unnecessary toe nail cancer!

Tippz - "Of course they are going to insist it is safe; they are not going to admit it's not are they?"

How tiresome it is when some people seem fixated on the idea that "they" (some nebulous powers-that-be) are intent upon foisting dangerous vaccines on our children - why pray might "they" wish to do that??!!

This is a costly programme at a time when the NHS is strapped for cash - logically they would not do it if it were not effective.

OP - you were right to sign the form and your DD will thank you for it in years to come.

LadyMelbourne that analogy is a stroke of genius!

Of course they are going to insist it is safe; they are not going to admit it's not are they?
I’d wager it’s a hell of a lot safer than cancer.

In what way am I missing the point? I’ve made several posts on this thread in support of the HPV vaccine (and paid a lot of money to have my sons vaccinated against HPV), I’m aware it’s preventable

It's a personal decision and you're right to think about it op. You don't need your head wobbling or anything like that.

I didn't allow my child to have it It's not compulsory, but you have to do your own research and make your own mind up about these things instead of asking MN.

Mama bear you're right, it's a personal thing. And hopefully your kids won't be at risk of hpv if they are sexually actively with those who were vaccinated. So if my vaccinated daughter has sex with your unvaccinated son (I've no idea if you have sons, just saying) she'll be ok because she's been vaccinated and he'll be ok because she's been vaccinated.

Lettuce that's great, I was referring to the relevance aspect - sex and preventability are being conflated.
I was separating the two

Surely the number of sexual partners your daughter has is a complete red herring given it only takes one to transmit it?
They could have an affair, they could have had hundreds before, or they could have had one before with it.
i am not sure trying to predict your child's sexual future and their partners sexual past should be a consideration as to if they have the vaccine

stv.tv/news/uk/1401913-hpv-vaccination-will-reduce-number-of-smear-tests-needed/

(Surely the number of sexual partners your daughter has is a complete red herring given it only takes one to transmit it?

Not at all. Of course it only takes one to transmit it but every partner is a roll of the roulette wheel. If you spin it a hundred times you've more chance of winning than if you spin it once.

It's weird. Everyone's looking for a cure for cancer, and here we are with a vaccine that significantly reduces the number of incidences of a nasty prevalent cancer and people are going 'oooh no'

Agreed.

hot buttered
Yes your upping your odds the more partners. I get that.
But your making that assumption and using a crystal ball for your daughter and her partner (S)

If your making that choice for yourself, that's ok. But you can't use that as part of your decision making for someone else when they are 13 and you've no idea of who their partner (s) will be and what their history is. They may become a nun (good for them) or they may chose to have hundreds of partners (good for them)

But your making that assumption and using a crystal ball for your daughter and her partners

Not at all, since the vaccine is the right decision either way, there is no need for me to even consider the question.

If anyone was in doubt about the vaccine...

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-41929267

My daughter had the vaccine and I regretted it afterwards. If you actually read the clinical trials of the actual drug, it has not been trialled long enough to suggest it protects people for 15 years. There is not enough evidence to show the protection and yet the government insist it is the better. They have now stopped routine smears (not to be confused with suspected cancer) as it is more costlier than this vaccine. This is why it has been favoured. Cost!
These teenage girls are given the vaccine but actually how many strains is it covering given that there are thousands of strains of the hpv virus.
There have been drugs out over the years which we were told were good (morning sickness tablet in the sixties which caused missing limbs in babies to name one) but at the end of the day, there is not always evidence there.
Why do u think many health professionals and doctors refuse the flu jab?

Why do u think many health professionals and doctors refuse the flu jab?

If I met a single health professional or doctor who had refused the flu jab I guess I could answer this question. But so far I have not.

They have not stopped routine smears.

Some areas are piloting primary HPV testing but most of England certainly still has a 3-5 yearly cervical screening programme.

These teenage girls are given the vaccine but actually how many strains is it covering given that there are thousands of strains of the hpv virus

Gardasil is a vaccine, licensed for use in June 2006, by the FDA. It targets four strains of human papillomavirus (HPV) -- HPV-6, 11, 16, and 18. HPV-16 and HPV-18 account for about 70% of all cervical cancers.

www.webmd.com/vaccines/features/hpv-cervical-cancer-vaccine-15-facts#1

It protects against the strains that can lead to cancer. The other strains don't cause a problem. Well, some cause warts but that strain does not cause cancer.

So the vaccine does indeed cover the cancer causing strains.

I'm an hcp and yes I do know a few colleagues who don't have the flu jab, mainly as it's shit having to work feeling a bit off for a few hours which isn't unusual. The vast majority do though because it's infinitely better than the flu.

Also why on earth wouldn't the NHS look at the cost of an intervention. Cost/benefit isn't some shady backroom deal, it's what we all use to make decisions all our lives.