Letters to the Editor | Letters to the Editor | Indy Week
Pin It

Letters to the Editor 

HPV questions

"Fundamentalists fight mandatory HPV vaccine" (Exile on Jones Street, Kirk Ross, Feb. 7) follows familiar logic: If "fundamentalists" oppose mandatory HPV vaccination, then mandatory HPV vaccination must be a good thing. If only it were that simple. On the same day I read about the mandatory HPV vaccination debate in The New York Times, I came across an article in Business Week highlighting the profit potential of vaccines. Due to a sluggish blockbuster drug pipeline, vaccines—once the poor relation of drug development—are now the favored child. Whereas pharmaceutical sales are growing only 5 percent to 6 percent a year, vaccine sales are increasing nearly 20 percent annually. The number of vaccines in development has tripled over the last decade, partly thanks to tort reform and legislation reducing liability risks for drugmakers.

So is Big Pharma's shifting focus from drugs to vaccines good news for public health? More specifically, should parents of young girls reflexively embrace Gardisil, Merck's HPV vaccine? Hard to say. In a 2004 report to Congress, the director of the Centers for Disease Control noted that 70 percent of new HPV infections clear up on their own within one year, around 91 percent clear within two years and "most women with persistent HPV infection do not develop low-grade cervical cell abnormalities, cervical cancer precursors or cervical cancer." Are those numbers good enough for parents to confidently question Merck's heavy lobbying for mandatory vaccination policies, which, by the way, critics are calling a "help pay for Vioxx litigation" campaign? I don't envy parents facing this decision on behalf of their young daughters—it's far from a no-brainer.

Kathy Jo Wetter
Durham

Latest in Letters to the Editor

Comments

Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

INDY Week publishes all kinds of comments, but we don't publish everything.

  • Comments that are not contributing to the conversation will be removed.
  • Comments that include ad hominem attacks will also be removed.
  • Please do not copy and paste the full text of a press release.

Permitted HTML:
  • To create paragraphs in your comment, type <p> at the start of a paragraph and </p> at the end of each paragraph.
  • To create bold text, type <b>bolded text</b> (please note the closing tag, </b>).
  • To create italicized text, type <i>italicized text</i> (please note the closing tag, </i>).
  • Proper web addresses will automatically become links.

Latest in Letters to the Editor



Twitter Activity

Comments

When you pull tongue-in-cheek comments out of context of the original thread, it'd be nice if you had the courtesy …

by Heath Satow on Not a Lot of Nazi Statues in Berlin (Letters to the Editor)

Thanks for pulling my quote out without noting that the comment was made tongue-in-cheek. A bit creepy when you pull …

by Heath Satow on Not a Lot of Nazi Statues in Berlin (Letters to the Editor)

Most Read

  1. Not a Lot of Nazi Statues in Berlin (Letters to the Editor)

Most Recent Comments

When you pull tongue-in-cheek comments out of context of the original thread, it'd be nice if you had the courtesy …

by Heath Satow on Not a Lot of Nazi Statues in Berlin (Letters to the Editor)

Thanks for pulling my quote out without noting that the comment was made tongue-in-cheek. A bit creepy when you pull …

by Heath Satow on Not a Lot of Nazi Statues in Berlin (Letters to the Editor)

was the misogony stuff actually some type of performance art?

by sthomper on Mob Rule (Letters to the Editor)

Ryan Plankenhorn appears to have good intentions with his remarks, and it is much appreciated. I would kindly like him …

by MelissaJ123 on Blind Attack (Letters to the Editor)

Who are these people who behave so badly and dare anyone to comment on them in public? Are they relatively …

by MickeyNotMouse on Mob Rule (Letters to the Editor)

© 2017 Indy Week • 320 E. Chapel Hill St., Suite 200, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation