WashPost's Kumar: It's 'Contentious' to Repeal Mandate Forcing Girls to Get HPV Vaccine
In a Metro section front-page article today, the Washington Post's Anita Kumar labeled as "contentious" a bill that the Virginia Senate scuttled that "would have repealed a requirement that schoolgirls be immunized against a virus linked to cervical cancer before entering the sixth grade."
Yes, this is the same Washington Post that is slamming as intrusive and medically unnecessary a pre-abortion ultrasound mandate.
"The state has required the vaccination against the human papillomavirus for five years but allows parents to opt out their children," Kumar reminded readers. "Senate Democrats took credit Monday for the defeat of the HPV repeal."
For her part, Kumar failed to directly quote any proponents of the repeal, choosing simply to say they believe "parents, not the government, should decide whether girls should be vaccinated." But Kumar then quoted a Democrat who slammed opponents of the HPV mandate as anti-science and anti-reason.
"Whatever we do in this body, we should do based on reason and not based on rigid ideology," Kumar quoted State Sen. John Edwards of Roanoke, whom Kumar noted had a "sister-in-law [who] recently died of HPV."
Like this post? Please consider helping us out with a tax-deductible donation by clicking here. Every $5 or $10 goes a long way towards helping finance our mission of exposing and combating liberal media bias.
But just as "rigid ideology" may be a bad driver of public policy, isn't personal grief equally suspect? What's more, Kumar failed to present a conservative who would argue that state senate Democrats are driven by an ideology of expanding government power and pushing parents into a corner where they must proactively opt-out of a state mandate regarding a disease which is only spread through sexual contact, not casual contact like say measles, mumps or rubella.
Kumar's bias, however, is not surprising given the Post's longstanding editorial position in favor of the Virginia mandate. In a March 9, 2007 editorial entitled, "A Shot of Common Sense," the Post highly praised the state legislature for passing and then-Gov. Tim Kaine (D) for signing the mandate into law (emphases mine):
VIRGINIA GOV. Timothy M. Kaine (D) brought some much-needed sense to the increasingly irrational national debate about immunizing girls and young women against a virus linked to cervical cancer. Mr. Kaine announced that he will sign a bill that will require shots for all sixth-grade girls unless their parents object to the inoculation. It properly balances parental rights and the government's role in promoting public health.
That Mr. Kaine had initial "qualms" about the legislation, even though it breezed through the General Assembly, is due no doubt to the recent controversy surrounding efforts to mandate use of the human papillomavirus vaccine. Public attitudes about the vaccine, as The Post's Susan Levine reported, have metamorphosed in the nine months since it won federal approval to rave reviews. Some people grew wary because of the misguided lobbying efforts, thankfully now abandoned, of the vaccine's maker, Merck & Co. Some are unsettled by the prospect of adolescent girls getting shots against a sexually transmitted virus.
Blurred in this backlash is the undisputed effectiveness of the vaccine, Gardasil, against strains of a virus that causes 70 percent of cervical cancer cases. It's an awful disease that in the United States kills an estimated 10 women each day. The vaccine is also potent against the damaging effects of venereal warts. Women should still get pap smears, since the vaccine is not effective against all strains of the virus.
Under Virginia legislation, as well as legislation pending before the D.C. Council, parents have the final say. They won't have to cite any reason, and no student will be kept out of school because her parents decided against the shots. Some parents may worry that though it passed rigorous testing with flying colors, side effects may emerge as the vaccine is used more widely. But so far, the only side effect of the vaccine (which is free of mercury and thimerosal) has been soreness at the site of injection. And a recent study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that at least 25 million girls and women -- or about one in four from age 14 to 59 -- are infected with at least one type of HPV. One in seven have high-risk infections.
For a virus so widespread and potentially harmful, an opt-out regime, which will lead to higher rates of immunization than one asking parents to opt in, makes sense. For their part, government and health workers must ensure a good public information campaign and help make the vaccine affordable to the needy. It is, as Mr. Kaine said, just the right balance.
- Ken Shepherd's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
⇒ Herald Kumar
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 12:42pm.
You won't find me on record as being against an HPV vaccination program. That's what turned me against Michele Bachmann.
Guaran-dam-tee you if an HIV vaccine so effective were available, it would be mandated.
If the vaccine is so great,
Submitted by Ken Shepherd on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 1:03pm.
If the vaccine is so great, then by all means, encourage parents to educate themselves about it and decide if it's right for their girls (and boys, as pediatricians are no saying pre-teen boys also could benefit from it). But to mandate it, even with a parental opt-out, is to put the state in the position of pushing a medically unnecessary vaccine that has no nexus to immediate public health.
Kids going to public schools must be vaccinated for all kinds of diseases which are communicable in casual contact in public settings like measles, mumps, rubella, TB, etc. Those vaccine requires make sense to safeguard the health of other students and teachers in the classroom. No so with the HPV mandate.
⇒ Polio
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 7:12pm.
My home town was pretty much ground Zero for the Polio outbreak of the '50s. If it's your contention it is absolutely impossible for a virgin bride to contract HPV from her husband, I guess I'll agree with you.
I still disagree with Michele Bachmann's anecdotal nonsense about retardation resulting from the HPV vaccine.
I also disagree with your assessment that since HPV is not an immediate risk (after all, Herpes is not yet cervical cancer), it should not be addressed. This is the logic that makes a distinction between HIV and AIDS. Personally, I'd just as soon come into contact with neither.
Ken, I don't know to what degree this vaccine is effective or safe, but you're not even allowing there might at some point be a level of acceptable risk.
Cool
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 7:37pm.
There is anecdotal evidence about severe side effects from the vaccine. That's true of any vaccine or medicine you take. Risks of the illness need to be weighed against the risks of contracting the virus.
This is one of those vaccines that I think parents should be able to decide. Once they hit 18, children are no longer children and can decide for themselves.
ObamaCare: Death panels for the individual and his conscience
Submitted by needle on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 1:00pm.
It is evident that from now on the net effect of ObamaCare is that all personal views and thoughts about this vaccine or that medical procedure, etc., etc., etc., ad nauseam will no longer be personal, but will be subject to political scrutiny, vilification, and campy jingoism.
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
Yeah, it's contentious, and
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 1:07pm.
Yeah, it's contentious, and controversial, and divisive, and every other word the liberals come up with whenever anyone disagrees with them.
This is Just one Issue that sank the Perry Campaign
Submitted by OldJarhead77 on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 1:23pm.
Rick Perry tried to push this through in Texas not through the legislature but by mandate.... and he was Heartily and DEEPLY REBUKED for doing it. Funny how people that were against Perry doing it in Texas are ok with VA doing it. Perry in Texas saw that this was a killer of women and tried to inact the same kind of mandatory shot and was total ripped for it. I came up repeatedly on the campaign trail and was used as a club against him by the same people (dems) that are touting that they stopped the repeal of this mess.... one word for you here HYPOCRITES!!!!
Talk about an asinine argument!
Submitted by CobraMan on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 1:39pm.
Hay, WashPo, how many six graders contract HPV? This isn't the Measles, you know. The chances of any preteen contracting HPV caused cervical cancer is next to nothing.
Here's an idea, immunize the women who are susceptible to HPV caused cervical cancer, and not the kids who are highly unlikely to contract it the near future. They women will require "booster shots" later in life, when they are actually susceptible to HVP, anyways, so why immunizes the kids needlessly?
You would think that people, after seeing the negative effects of over-immunization, like the continual evolution of immunization-resistant viruses (just like we see with the continual evolution of "resistant" bacteria, something that we were warned was going to occur due to the over prescribed use of antibiotics as a "preventive" treatment), would stop trying to immunize our children for every conceivable viral infection, no matter when in life that infection may, or may not, occur. How many time will this HPV "cure" need to be reformulated over the next ten to twenty years simple because we thought it was the magic bullet and "immunized" every boy and girl in America? You know, just like the Greats of Medical Science are forced to do each and every year for such a common disease as the flu?
I wonder if it has ever occurred to the "experts" that these types of national immunization programs may actually be causing these "super viruses" and not avoiding them as hoped?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
⇒ Pretty high?
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 7:24pm.
HPV is contracted in something so innocent as "Spin The Bottle". Granted, it will probably be years before said virus is transferred to the genitalia, but it is possible for genital viruses to grow on the lips.
But, apparently, there is no
Submitted by ant on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 2:04pm.
But, apparently, there is no threat in allowing unchecked immigration to introduce potential epidemics into the population. When I was in Massachusetts and the local illegal alien community grew, the public school was swept with a TB out-break. Of course, the press reported that these things 'just happen'. Maybe they meant because you don't to have to promote a sexual promiscuous lifestyle to sixth-graders for these air-borne illnesses to affect them./sarc.
Mandate?
Submitted by David Kramer on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 5:47pm.
So what happens if a few years down the road, numerous complications are discovered? Any recourse? Of course not.
Sorry, those that want to be promiscuous will die out. Simple darwinism. Why are Democrats anti science?
Being flippant here because of the mandate and what it is for.