surely this is evidence that state funded faith schools are run by total nutters

[Reallytired]

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7633761.stm

I cannot understand why a school should not want to be involved in the vacination programme against cervial cancer. It may be true that the HPV is sexually transmitted, but a good catholic wife could end up with cervial cancer if her husband has an affair.

Prehaps the catholic school governors think that cervial cancer is a well deserved punishment, in the same way that a few strange people thought that homosexuals deserved AIDS.

Should such people be allowed run state funded schools. Especially as the mainstream Catholic Church doesn't object to the vaccine.

Fivecandles I completely agree with you that all drugs carry a risk. Administering medications in an ethical manner must therefore be based on two vital concepts; informed consent and INDIVIDUAL risk/benefit ratio. Neither of these are applied to vaccination in its current form.

Currently, safety and efficacy information about vaccines is completely under the control of manufacturers. This situation is unacceptable. Are we so naive as to think that the people who make money from a product should be the ones to police the safety of that product and to influence decisions on how that product should be used in public health policy? That they should be the ones to provide information to healthcare providers concerning safety, efficacy and cost effectiveness?

The current reporting system for vaccine reactions is woefully inadequate, I know, I've tried to use it. Doctors who are perfectly willing to report adverse reactions to antibiotics suddenly become very unwilling to report reactions to vaccines. Why do you think that is, and how do you think that affects our ability to judge how safe a particular vaccine is in the context of mass vaccination?

For info on the Gardasil associated deaths I think the following article is interesting. Of course Merck have declared that these deaths are 'coincidental' and not related to the vaccine despite some similarities in the cases. Why should we trust Merck to be truthful about whether their own product is safe? Particularly considering how much money is at stake. We need an independent investigation into these deaths as soon as possible.

Merck has recently shown that it cannot be trusted in such matters as safety testing and monitoring adverse events by the Vioxx incident. Vioxx litigation is costing Merck millions of dollars, has put huge financial pressure on the company and led to a fall in share price. Thousand of people have died as a result of Merck failing to test this product adequately and, even worse, failing to withdraw the product immediately on finding out how dangerous it was. Merck needs the revenue that Gardasil is expected to pull in (we are talking billions of dollars here) and has a lot riding on this product. I think it is utter madness to expect a company in this position to be impartial and transparent. The very fact that this HPV vaccine has been fast tracked and is being used on general license before the end of the testing period should ring very loud alarm bells. Also the vaccine is being recommended for use in girls as young as 9 despite only very limited testing in this age group. If you were the parent of a previously perfectly healthy child who died after receiving Merck's vaccine would you believe them when they declared that death a coincidence, just as they declared for years that people dying of heart failure after taking Vioxx was a coincidence? I know I wouldn't.

everyone is talking about the here and now what about 10 or 20 years how will it affect fertility or the children these girls will have does anyone know. it came up in discussion about whether my 15 yrs old should have it. we are really unsure!