sf > wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 14:09:16 +0100, Janet > wrote:
>
>> In article >, says...
>>>
>>>
>>> Wrong. If it were that important, then it would be added to the lists of
>>> required shots. It's not.
>>
>> It is, in UK
>>
>> http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccina...ges/hpv-human-
>> papillomavirus-vaccine.aspx
>>
>> "All girls aged 12 to 13 are offered HPV (human papilloma virus)
>> vaccination as part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme. The
>> vaccine protects against cervical cancer. It's usually given to girls in
>> year eight at schools in England.
>>
>> According to Cancer Research UK, cervical cancer is the second
>> mostcommon cancer in women under the age of 35.
>> Which girls should have the HPV vaccination?
>>
>> The HPV vaccine is part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme and
>> is routinely offered to secondary school girls aged 12 and 13.
>> It's a safe vaccine and there are very few girls who aren't suitable for
>> HPV vaccination. However, special precautions may need to be taken for
>> girls with certain health conditio
>
> ns, or who have ever had a severe
>> allergic reaction (anaphylaxis).
>>
>> Read more about who should have the HPV vaccine."
>> HPV vaccine safety
>>
>> http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vaccina...cine-cervarix-
>> gardasil-safety.aspx
>>
>>
>> janet UK
>
> A HMO called Kaiser Permanente (which operates in California;
> Colorado; Georgia; Hawaii; Maryland; Oregon; Virginia; Washington;
> Washington D.C.) has it on their list too. I texted my DIL to see if
> my 14 YO grandson had gotten it yet and she says he did.
>
> http://kff.org/womens-health-policy/...ss-and-use-in/
>
> According to that document
>
> The federal Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
> recommends that all girls and boys get vaccinated at age 11 or 12, and
> that girls and women ages 13-26 and boys and men ages 13-21 be given a
> “catch-up” vaccination. The vaccine is recommended for use in men
> ages 22-26 if they have not been previously vaccinated, are
> immunocompromised, or engage in sexual activity with other men. ACIP
> recommended the vaccine for females in 2006 and added the
> recommendation for males in 2011. ACIP recommended the new HPV vaccine
> in February 2015 for females ages 9-26 and boys ages 9-15. Off label
> use for the new vaccine for males ages 16-21 is allowed, and a
> recommendation for this age group is expected to follow in the coming
> years.
>
> I don't know if Julie expects a social worker to knock on her door and
> tell her to vaccinate her child or what. Apparently an easy way to
> prevent certain forms of cancer isn't of any concern.
>

I'm not sure what kind of logic (or not) was used to decide the unproven
risk of paralysis outweighs the proven risk of getting cancer.

--
jinx the minx

"Janet B" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 03:12:41 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"graham" > wrote in message
...
>>> On 31/05/2016 4:45 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "graham" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> On 30/05/2016 4:09 PM, Roy wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, May 30, 2016 at 2:25:00 PM UTC-6, graham wrote:
>>>>>>> On 30/05/2016 1:30 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "l not -l" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 29-May-2016, "Julie Bove" > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, May 29, 2016 at 1:18:55 PM UTC-5, Jill McQuown wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> When Mom was alive she kept seeing ads for probiotics. She was
>>>>>>>>>>>> like,
>>>>>>>>>>>> "What's that?" Beats me, but be assured they're trying to sell
>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>> yogurt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jill
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Probiotics have more good bacteria than just plain
>>>>>>>>>>> yogurt. I learned they can REALLY help with severe
>>>>>>>>>>> gut issues that for some unfathomable reason I was
>>>>>>>>>>> plagued with 2 years ago two or three times. I
>>>>>>>>>>> take a probiotic capsule daily and that misery seems
>>>>>>>>>>> to be a thing of the past. Don't know what brought it
>>>>>>>>>>> on either.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We now know that one reason for the appendix is that it's a
>>>>>>>>>> natural
>>>>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> of probiotics. People who have had theirs removed, need to
>>>>>>>>>> supplement.
>>>>>>>>> How do we know this, an article in Prevention, or similar,
>>>>>>>>> magazine or
>>>>>>>>> peer-reviewed, published research? It seems odd that if this is
>>>>>>>>> true
>>>>>>>>> medical knowledge, that no doctor has suggested probiotics to me
>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>> the 66
>>>>>>>>> years I have been without an appendix (removed as a young child).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My naturopath first told me this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Naturopaths are quacks. If you believe him, you'll believe anything!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +++ on the quacks...one of my daughters believes what they say about
>>>>>> vaccinations and refuses to get her son immunized against any of the
>>>>>> nasty diseases. She will not listen to reason...must have inherited
>>>>>> that from her mother. Too bad, because immunization has been proven
>>>>>> to be effective for eons.
>>>>>> ====
>>>>>>
>>>>> How awful for you!
>>>>> I'm fortunate in that regard as both sets of my grandchildren have had
>>>>> the appropriate jabs - including my grandson having the HPV jab.
>>>>
>>>> I hadn't heard of that. I had to look it up!
>>>>
>>> They gave it to girls at first then they realised that boys can become
>>> carriers too.
>>> Graham
>>But it is controversial.
>
> Initially, yes. Mostly parents reaction to thinking of their children
> as sexual beings.
> Janet US

No. Because the the shots can cause serious and in some cases permanent
damage. If anyone is thinking of their children as sexual beings, they're
just plain sick. If they think their children are never going to have sex
(not necessarily as minors), they are clueless. I am not going to get into
the issue of minors having sex here. I say this as the moderator of an over
18 place elsewhere. Just too many reasons for it not to be discussed. You
can use your imagination. I will not get into that.

"barbie gee" > wrote in message
hcrg.pbz...
>
>
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>>
>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Tue, 31 May 2016 09:19:08 -0600, graham > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 31/05/2016 4:45 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "graham" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> On 30/05/2016 4:09 PM, Roy wrote:
>>>>>>> On Monday, May 30, 2016 at 2:25:00 PM UTC-6, graham wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 30/05/2016 1:30 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "l not -l" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 29-May-2016, "Julie Bove" > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, May 29, 2016 at 1:18:55 PM UTC-5, Jill McQuown
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> When Mom was alive she kept seeing ads for probiotics. She
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>>> like,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "What's that?" Beats me, but be assured they're trying to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> sell
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>> yogurt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jill
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Probiotics have more good bacteria than just plain
>>>>>>>>>>>> yogurt. I learned they can REALLY help with severe
>>>>>>>>>>>> gut issues that for some unfathomable reason I was
>>>>>>>>>>>> plagued with 2 years ago two or three times. I
>>>>>>>>>>>> take a probiotic capsule daily and that misery seems
>>>>>>>>>>>> to be a thing of the past. Don't know what brought it
>>>>>>>>>>>> on either.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We now know that one reason for the appendix is that it's a
>>>>>>>>>>> natural
>>>>>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> of probiotics. People who have had theirs removed, need to
>>>>>>>>>>> supplement.
>>>>>>>>>> How do we know this, an article in Prevention, or similar,
>>>>>>>>>> magazine or
>>>>>>>>>> peer-reviewed, published research? It seems odd that if this is
>>>>>>>>>> true
>>>>>>>>>> medical knowledge, that no doctor has suggested probiotics to me
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> the 66
>>>>>>>>>> years I have been without an appendix (removed as a young child).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My naturopath first told me this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Naturopaths are quacks. If you believe him, you'll believe
>>>>>>>> anything!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +++ on the quacks...one of my daughters believes what they say about
>>>>>>> vaccinations and refuses to get her son immunized against any of the
>>>>>>> nasty diseases. She will not listen to reason...must have inherited
>>>>>>> that from her mother. Too bad, because immunization has been proven
>>>>>>> to be effective for eons.
>>>>>>> ====
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> How awful for you!
>>>>>> I'm fortunate in that regard as both sets of my grandchildren have
>>>>>> had
>>>>>> the appropriate jabs - including my grandson having the HPV jab.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hadn't heard of that. I had to look it up!
>>>>>
>>>> They gave it to girls at first then they realised that boys can become
>>>> carriers too.
>>>> Graham
>>>
>>> the overall problem is that if it isn't received at an early enough
>>> age, it is too late. Because either the girl will become sexually
>>> active and exposed or if 'pure', chances are her husband will have
>>> been exposed. I would really be angry at my mother if she left me
>>> open to cancer when there was a good way to avoid it.
>>> Janet US
>>
>> The vaccine can cause paralysis. Not a chance I'm willing to take.
>
> citation, and frequency of this adverse affect per total number of those
> vaccinated, please.

I don't have those statistics. I did put up links. The Drs. we see say that
they can only offer the vaccine. It is up to us to do research. They can not
recommend it. Nor can they not recommend it. Only offer it if we want it.
Here's some more links. I think the main problem is that the vaccine is too
new to have statistics.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hpv-vacc...ens-paralysis/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hpv-vacc...ens-paralysis/

"graham" > wrote in message
...
> On 01/06/2016 4:16 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Tue, 31 May 2016 09:19:08 -0600, graham > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 31/05/2016 4:45 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "graham" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> On 30/05/2016 4:09 PM, Roy wrote:
>>>>>>> On Monday, May 30, 2016 at 2:25:00 PM UTC-6, graham wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 30/05/2016 1:30 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "l not -l" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 29-May-2016, "Julie Bove" > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, May 29, 2016 at 1:18:55 PM UTC-5, Jill McQuown
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> When Mom was alive she kept seeing ads for probiotics. She
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>>> like,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "What's that?" Beats me, but be assured they're trying to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> sell
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>> yogurt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jill
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Probiotics have more good bacteria than just plain
>>>>>>>>>>>> yogurt. I learned they can REALLY help with severe
>>>>>>>>>>>> gut issues that for some unfathomable reason I was
>>>>>>>>>>>> plagued with 2 years ago two or three times. I
>>>>>>>>>>>> take a probiotic capsule daily and that misery seems
>>>>>>>>>>>> to be a thing of the past. Don't know what brought it
>>>>>>>>>>>> on either.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We now know that one reason for the appendix is that it's a
>>>>>>>>>>> natural
>>>>>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> of probiotics. People who have had theirs removed, need to
>>>>>>>>>>> supplement.
>>>>>>>>>> How do we know this, an article in Prevention, or similar,
>>>>>>>>>> magazine or
>>>>>>>>>> peer-reviewed, published research? It seems odd that if this is
>>>>>>>>>> true
>>>>>>>>>> medical knowledge, that no doctor has suggested probiotics to
>>>>>>>>>> me in
>>>>>>>>>> the 66
>>>>>>>>>> years I have been without an appendix (removed as a young child).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My naturopath first told me this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Naturopaths are quacks. If you believe him, you'll believe
>>>>>>>> anything!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +++ on the quacks...one of my daughters believes what they say about
>>>>>>> vaccinations and refuses to get her son immunized against any of the
>>>>>>> nasty diseases. She will not listen to reason...must have inherited
>>>>>>> that from her mother. Too bad, because immunization has been proven
>>>>>>> to be effective for eons.
>>>>>>> ====
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> How awful for you!
>>>>>> I'm fortunate in that regard as both sets of my grandchildren have
>>>>>> had
>>>>>> the appropriate jabs - including my grandson having the HPV jab.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hadn't heard of that. I had to look it up!
>>>>>
>>>> They gave it to girls at first then they realised that boys can become
>>>> carriers too.
>>>> Graham
>>>
>>> the overall problem is that if it isn't received at an early enough
>>> age, it is too late. Because either the girl will become sexually
>>> active and exposed or if 'pure', chances are her husband will have
>>> been exposed. I would really be angry at my mother if she left me
>>> open to cancer when there was a good way to avoid it.
>>> Janet US
>>
>> The vaccine can cause paralysis. Not a chance I'm willing to take.
>
> What a load of ********! FFS stop listening to your stupid naturopath!

Well, I am not going to give her name here but I do know of a girl who is
now paralyzed because of this. I never discussed this with my naturopath.

"Janet B" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 03:25:32 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"Janet B" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> On Tue, 31 May 2016 00:20:33 -0700, "Julie Bove"
>>> > wrote:
>>> snip
>>>>
>>>>I draw the line with the HPV. Nope.
>>>
>>> You have the opportunity to save your daughter from cervical cancer at
>>> the very least. Why wouldn't you?
>>> Janet US
>>
>>Because I don't want to take the chance of her being paralyzed. And it's
>>not
>>just one shot. It's a series. I know a girl who is a year younger than
>>her.
>>First shot? No problem. Second shot? Wound up in the hospital and now she
>>can't walk. The shot is controversial and the Drs. here can not recommend
>>it. Or not, not recommend it. They merely just ask if you want it or not.
>>
>>http://health.usnews.com/health-news...-and-paralysis
>>
>>http://kidshealth.org/en/teens/gbs-hpv.html
>>
>>http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hpv-vacc...ens-paralysis/
>>
>>There are plenty more links.
>>
>>My daughter is very prone to allergic reactions and side effects to
>>things.
>>So much so that her Drs. now don't even want to prescribe something unless
>>it is totally necessary. I am not going to get into all of that here, but
>>this past year wasn't pretty and she had to go see a specialist to help
>>her
>>recover from the side effects of a med. Thankfully that is behind us now.
>
> You need to respond to your daughter's health as you see fit. However,
> the articles you post prove diddly. The headlines are in reaction to
> a parent's blog that instigated a regular review by the CDC and
> others. If you read the articles beyond the media headlines, there
> is no substantiation to your claims. All point out that the paralysis
> easily could be attributed to other causes. One shot? vs. three? Why
> is that a big deal? It can't be financial for you. I'm no math
> person, but the statistical possibilities considering testing prior to
> release to public and the number of shots given so far are pretty
> thin. All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
> Janet US

Here's what a Dr. said to us. Most kids of that age do not want one shot,
let alone three. Most parents these days might get the kid the first shot
but are going to forget to take them back to get the others. And the others
have to be administered in a specific time frame. If they're not, they're
not at all effective. That in and of itself means that most people are not
compliant.

The person we know became ill within 24 hours of the second shot.

I am diabetic. I well remember the problems caused by Rezulin. And now
Januvuia. Thankfully my Endo. is of the school that new meds are not
necessarily something we want to use. Let them be on the market for 10 years
or so and if they prove to be good, then try them.

Pharmaceutical companies tell us all sorts of things. Doesn't mean they are
all try. They can spin things any way they want.

What I think is really odd is that the people here pushing for this vaccine
do not have kids of an age to get it. If they did they'd likely be talking
to other parents and getting information from the school like we did.

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Janet B wrote:
>>
>> All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>
> Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
> from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
> more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>
> IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens. They are almost
> adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
> course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
> vaccine until they do start having sex.
>
> It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
> never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either. How
> did we ever survive without this new drug.
>
> IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
> vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
> for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
>
> I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
> decide.

Thanks. I did tell her that she could have it if she wanted it. But based on
how many times I have had to race her to the hospital from something a med
caused, she opted not to. This last year was pretty much hell for a good
portion of it based on what a med did to her. Only a few here know that
story. Not going to post it publicly. I don't need the wrath. I will say
that there was only a very small risk of what happened to her. But it did
happen. And it affected her life very badly.

"Janet B" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:37:21 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>>Janet B wrote:
>>>
>>> All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>>> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>>
>>Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>>from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>>more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>>
>>IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens. They are almost
>>adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>>course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>>vaccine until they do start having sex.
>>
>>It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>>never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either. How
>>did we ever survive without this new drug.
>>
>>IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
>>vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
>>for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
>>
>>I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
>>decide.
>
> Golly. You just don't know much about this do you? Yes, I read all
> the fact sheets. Yes, I read all about new vaccines, virus, etc. You
> need to go back and get some more info.
> Janet US

Nope. You do.

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Janet B wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:37:21 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>
>> >Janet B wrote:
>> >>
>> >> All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>> >> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>> >
>> >Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>> >from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>> >more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>> >
>> >IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens. They are almost
>> >adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>> >course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>> >vaccine until they do start having sex.
>> >
>> >It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>> >never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either. How
>> >did we ever survive without this new drug.
>> >
>> >IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
>> >vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
>> >for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
>> >
>> >I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
>> >decide.
>>
>> Golly. You just don't know much about this do you? Yes, I read all
>> the fact sheets. Yes, I read all about new vaccines, virus, etc. You
>> need to go back and get some more info.
>
> I'll bet you run out for the newest flu shot every year too, don't
> you?
> Don't be a lemming run off the cliff into the sea. Use your head.

Sounds like my parents. We love our pills! When we were little, we had no
pills. Now we can have them and they are great! No side effects either!

"Janet B" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:24:07 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>>Janet B wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:37:21 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>>
>>> >Janet B wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>>> >> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>>> >
>>> >Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>>> >from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>>> >more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>>> >
>>> >IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens. They are almost
>>> >adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>>> >course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>>> >vaccine until they do start having sex.
>>> >
>>> >It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>>> >never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either. How
>>> >did we ever survive without this new drug.
>>> >
>>> >IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
>>> >vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
>>> >for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
>>> >
>>> >I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
>>> >decide.
>>>
>>> Golly. You just don't know much about this do you? Yes, I read all
>>> the fact sheets. Yes, I read all about new vaccines, virus, etc. You
>>> need to go back and get some more info.
>>
>>I'll bet you run out for the newest flu shot every year too, don't
>>you?
>>Don't be a lemming run off the cliff into the sea. Use your head.
>
> There's nothing more to be said. You are paranoid.
> Janet us

He's fine. You might be delusional. Perhaps sw can decide. I only got to
psych. 101.

On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 14:22:08 -0700, sf > wrote:

>On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 15:24:47 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>
>> I am not sure if it is extremely sad or extremely amusing that she
>> rejects every piece of valid advice and information here but is a sponge
>> for nonsense factoids.
>
>It's not amusing to see such an easy cancer (genital warts etc)
>prevention being summarily dismissed like that.

not to mention limiting the spread of the virus.
Janet US

"Janet" > wrote in message
.. .
> In article >, says...
>>
>> Janet B wrote:
>> >
>> > All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>> > effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>>
>> Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>> from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>> more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>>
>> IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens.
>
> Most 12 yr olds have no concept of their own vulnerability to the
> commonest STD in USA; and you can hardly expect them to grasp it might
> kill them in one of several particularly horrible ways. Kids might
> "know" that people die from smoking, drugs, alcohol; but they are so
> sure it won't happen to them they do that stuff anyway.
>
>
> They are almost
>> adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>> course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>> vaccine until they do start having sex.
>
> You miss the point. Young teens might not be having penetrative
> intercourse, but they may be open-mouth kissing and mutually
> masturbating, and HPV can be transmitted by both.
>>
>> It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>> never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either.
>
> Maybe you both have HPV.
>
> http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv.htm
>
> "HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI). HPV is
> so common that nearly all sexually active men and women get it at some
> point in their lives."
>
> Janet.

So? Most people don't die from it either or even get cancer.

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Janet wrote:
>>
>> In article >, says...
>> >
>> > Janet B wrote:
>> > >
>> > > All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>> > > effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>> >
>> > Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>> > from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>> > more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>> >
>> > IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens.
>>
>> Most 12 yr olds have no concept of their own vulnerability to the
>> commonest STD in USA; and you can hardly expect them to grasp it might
>> kill them in one of several particularly horrible ways. Kids might
>> "know" that people die from smoking, drugs, alcohol; but they are so
>> sure it won't happen to them they do that stuff anyway.
>>
>> They are almost
>> > adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>> > course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>> > vaccine until they do start having sex.
>>
>> You miss the point. Young teens might not be having penetrative
>> intercourse, but they may be open-mouth kissing and mutually
>> masturbating, and HPV can be transmitted by both.
>> >
>> > It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>> > never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either.
>>
>> Maybe you both have HPV.
>>
>> http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv.htm
>>
>> "HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI). HPV is
>> so common that nearly all sexually active men and women get it at some
>> point in their lives."
>>
>> Janet.
>
> Do you have it, Janet? Have you been vaccinated?

*High five*

"Janet B" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 14:07:39 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>>Janet wrote:
>>>
>>> In article >, says...
>>> >
>>> > Janet B wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>>> > > effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>>> >
>>> > Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>>> > from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>>> > more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>>> >
>>> > IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens.
>>>
>>> Most 12 yr olds have no concept of their own vulnerability to the
>>> commonest STD in USA; and you can hardly expect them to grasp it might
>>> kill them in one of several particularly horrible ways. Kids might
>>> "know" that people die from smoking, drugs, alcohol; but they are so
>>> sure it won't happen to them they do that stuff anyway.
>>>
>>> They are almost
>>> > adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>>> > course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>>> > vaccine until they do start having sex.
>>>
>>> You miss the point. Young teens might not be having penetrative
>>> intercourse, but they may be open-mouth kissing and mutually
>>> masturbating, and HPV can be transmitted by both.
>>> >
>>> > It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>>> > never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either.
>>>
>>> Maybe you both have HPV.
>>>
>>> http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv.htm
>>>
>>> "HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI). HPV is
>>> so common that nearly all sexually active men and women get it at some
>>> point in their lives."
>>>
>>> Janet.
>>
>>Do you have it, Janet? Have you been vaccinated?
>
> Please, please go and read up on this so you don't embarrass yourself
> further.
> Janet US

You should be embarrassed. You're just apparently too stupid to know why.

"jinx the minx" > wrote in message
...
> Gary > wrote:
>> Janet B wrote:
>>>
>>> All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible side
>>> effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
>>
>> Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you away
>> from anything that you have to take. Even new drug commercials spend
>> more time telling you about the side effects rather than the benefits.
>>
>> IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens. They are almost
>> adults and should be given the option whether to take them or not. Of
>> course, *some* teens are NOT sexually active so they don't need the
>> vaccine until they do start having sex.
>>
>> It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term effects. I
>> never had it and neither did you. My daughter never got it either. How
>> did we ever survive without this new drug.
>>
>> IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
>> vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
>> for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
>>
>> I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
>> decide.
>>
>
> The problem is this. How many teens do you know that make healthy
> decisions about sexuality? The vaccine is given as a course of 3 doses,
> given over a 6 month timeframe. No teenager is going to make a
> conscientious decision to become sexually active, THEN go get the shot
> then
> wait half a year to act. Not gonna happen. And once you start having
> sex,
> it's almost pointless to then get the vaccine as you've already been
> exposed (and will keep getting exposed) to HPV. Whether exposure is to
> one
> of the strains that causes cancer or not is like playing Russian roulette.
> That is why the recommended age to get the vaccine is right around the age
> of 11-12. Is this really a decision an 11-12 year old could or should be
> making? You may think this vaccine isn't necessary, but if you knew even
> one woman with cervical cancer from HPV (and they now say all cervical
> cancer is caused by HPV) you may think otherwise. Of course you survived
> without it. You don't have a cervix.

You're missing the point. The vaccine is so new that we don't know the
safety of it. And there are known issues. I don't think he said it wasn't
necessary. Just that its safety isn't proven.

How old are you? How many people do you know who had cervical cancer? I'm
almost 57. I know one person. I know far more people who have had other
kinds of cancers than that.

On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:54:36 -0700, sf > wrote:

>On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 14:09:16 +0100, Janet > wrote:
>
>> In article >, says...
>> >
>> >
>> > Wrong. If it were that important, then it would be added to the lists of
>> > required shots. It's not.
>>
>> It is, in UK
>>
>> http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccina...ges/hpv-human-
>> papillomavirus-vaccine.aspx
>>
>> "All girls aged 12 to 13 are offered HPV (human papilloma virus)
>> vaccination as part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme. The
>> vaccine protects against cervical cancer. It's usually given to girls in
>> year eight at schools in England.
>>
>> According to Cancer Research UK, cervical cancer is the second
>> mostcommon cancer in women under the age of 35.
>> Which girls should have the HPV vaccination?
>>
>> The HPV vaccine is part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme and
>> is routinely offered to secondary school girls aged 12 and 13.
>> It's a safe vaccine and there are very few girls who aren't suitable for
>> HPV vaccination. However, special precautions may need to be taken for
>> girls with certain health conditio
>
>ns, or who have ever had a severe
>> allergic reaction (anaphylaxis).
>>
>> Read more about who should have the HPV vaccine."
>> HPV vaccine safety
>>
>> http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vaccina...cine-cervarix-
>> gardasil-safety.aspx
>>
>>
>> janet UK
>
>A HMO called Kaiser Permanente (which operates in California;
>Colorado; Georgia; Hawaii; Maryland; Oregon; Virginia; Washington;
>Washington D.C.) has it on their list too. I texted my DIL to see if
>my 14 YO grandson had gotten it yet and she says he did.
>
>http://kff.org/womens-health-policy/...ss-and-use-in/
>
>According to that document
>
>The federal Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
>recommends that all girls and boys get vaccinated at age 11 or 12, and
>that girls and women ages 13-26 and boys and men ages 13-21 be given a
>“catch-up” vaccination. The vaccine is recommended for use in men
>ages 22-26 if they have not been previously vaccinated, are
>immunocompromised, or engage in sexual activity with other men. ACIP
>recommended the vaccine for females in 2006 and added the
>recommendation for males in 2011. ACIP recommended the new HPV vaccine
>in February 2015 for females ages 9-26 and boys ages 9-15. Off label
>use for the new vaccine for males ages 16-21 is allowed, and a
>recommendation for this age group is expected to follow in the coming
>years.
>
>I don't know if Julie expects a social worker to knock on her door and
>tell her to vaccinate her child or what. Apparently an easy way to
>prevent certain forms of cancer isn't of any concern.

She believes that it is the drug companies that are spinning the
vaccine and creating the story. She says so upstream. I think that
means there isn't really a problem
Janet US

"barbie gee" > wrote in message
hcrg.pbz...
>
>
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>>
>> "Dave Smith" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 2016-05-31 9:20 AM, Janet B wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 31 May 2016 00:20:33 -0700, "Julie Bove"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> snip
>>>>>
>>>>> I draw the line with the HPV. Nope.
>>>>
>>>> You have the opportunity to save your daughter from cervical cancer at
>>>> the very least. Why wouldn't you?
>>>
>>>
>>> This is a woman who has had a foot infection that put her out of service
>>> for more than a week but who insists on drinking a dozen cans of diet
>>> soda every day despite being advised that it causes the same sort of
>>> problems that sugar does. She has proved herself to be resistance to
>>> fact and logic based advice.
>>
>> Those of you who are recommending the vaccine do not have kid of the age
>> to get it. If you did, and you had them get the vaccine, knowing the
>> possible consequences, I'd think even less of you than I do now. It's
>> also not one shot but a series of three.
>
> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone with
> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).

I do know a woman who had it. She's still alive.

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> barbie gee wrote:
>>
>> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone with
>> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
>> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
>
> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
> not?

Obviously because it wasn't around back then. But... I still say...and not
necessarily to you Gary...just throwing it out there. How many people do you
know who have had cervical cancer? I know one. How many do I know who have
had breast cancer? I lost count.

"graham" > wrote in message
...
> On 01/06/2016 11:19 AM, Gary wrote:
>> Janet B wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:00:23 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>>
>>>> barbie gee wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone
>>>>> with
>>>>> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
>>>>> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
>>>>
>>>> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
>>>> not?
>>>
>>> Have you? Why not?
>>> Janet US
>>
>> No, I haven't gotten one and I don't care about one.
>> I'm good and no one needs to pick on Julie about it either.
>>
> We are not picking on her! We are trying to help her see straight!

My eyes are not crossed.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 15:24:47 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> I am not sure if it is extremely sad or extremely amusing that she
>> rejects every piece of valid advice and information here but is a sponge
>> for nonsense factoids.
>
> It's not amusing to see such an easy cancer (genital warts etc)
> prevention being summarily dismissed like that.

Please explain how it is easy. You think the very specific timing of three
shots over the course of a 6 month period is easy? This is partly why such a
small percentage of people have completed it. Statistics seem to vary on
this depending on the source but it is somewhere around 30 percent who have
had all three. Don't have all three? Might not have even bothered for the
first one.

"dsi1" > wrote in message
...
> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 7:33:11 AM UTC-10, graham wrote:
>> On 01/06/2016 11:19 AM, Gary wrote:
>> > Janet B wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:00:23 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> barbie gee wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone
>> >>>> with
>> >>>> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
>> >>>> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
>> >>> not?
>> >>
>> >> Have you? Why not?
>> >> Janet US
>> >
>> > No, I haven't gotten one and I don't care about one.
>> > I'm good and no one needs to pick on Julie about it either.
>> >
>> We are not picking on her! We are trying to help her see straight!
>
> You might want to start with yourself first. By "you" and "yourself", I
> don't mean you you, I mean people that feel the need to help other people
> see straight.
*High five*

On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 15:24:46 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>
>"barbie gee" > wrote in message
ghcrg.pbz...
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Tue, 31 May 2016 09:19:08 -0600, graham > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 31/05/2016 4:45 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "graham" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> On 30/05/2016 4:09 PM, Roy wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Monday, May 30, 2016 at 2:25:00 PM UTC-6, graham wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 30/05/2016 1:30 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "l not -l" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 29-May-2016, "Julie Bove" > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, May 29, 2016 at 1:18:55 PM UTC-5, Jill McQuown
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When Mom was alive she kept seeing ads for probiotics. She
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "What's that?" Beats me, but be assured they're trying to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sell
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yogurt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jill
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Probiotics have more good bacteria than just plain
>>>>>>>>>>>>> yogurt. I learned they can REALLY help with severe
>>>>>>>>>>>>> gut issues that for some unfathomable reason I was
>>>>>>>>>>>>> plagued with 2 years ago two or three times. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> take a probiotic capsule daily and that misery seems
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be a thing of the past. Don't know what brought it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on either.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We now know that one reason for the appendix is that it's a
>>>>>>>>>>>> natural
>>>>>>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> of probiotics. People who have had theirs removed, need to
>>>>>>>>>>>> supplement.
>>>>>>>>>>> How do we know this, an article in Prevention, or similar,
>>>>>>>>>>> magazine or
>>>>>>>>>>> peer-reviewed, published research? It seems odd that if this is
>>>>>>>>>>> true
>>>>>>>>>>> medical knowledge, that no doctor has suggested probiotics to me
>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>> the 66
>>>>>>>>>>> years I have been without an appendix (removed as a young child).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My naturopath first told me this.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Naturopaths are quacks. If you believe him, you'll believe
>>>>>>>>> anything!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +++ on the quacks...one of my daughters believes what they say about
>>>>>>>> vaccinations and refuses to get her son immunized against any of the
>>>>>>>> nasty diseases. She will not listen to reason...must have inherited
>>>>>>>> that from her mother. Too bad, because immunization has been proven
>>>>>>>> to be effective for eons.
>>>>>>>> ====
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How awful for you!
>>>>>>> I'm fortunate in that regard as both sets of my grandchildren have
>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>> the appropriate jabs - including my grandson having the HPV jab.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hadn't heard of that. I had to look it up!
>>>>>>
>>>>> They gave it to girls at first then they realised that boys can become
>>>>> carriers too.
>>>>> Graham
>>>>
>>>> the overall problem is that if it isn't received at an early enough
>>>> age, it is too late. Because either the girl will become sexually
>>>> active and exposed or if 'pure', chances are her husband will have
>>>> been exposed. I would really be angry at my mother if she left me
>>>> open to cancer when there was a good way to avoid it.
>>>> Janet US
>>>
>>> The vaccine can cause paralysis. Not a chance I'm willing to take.
>>
>> citation, and frequency of this adverse affect per total number of those
>> vaccinated, please.
>
>I don't have those statistics. I did put up links. The Drs. we see say that
>they can only offer the vaccine. It is up to us to do research. They can not
>recommend it. Nor can they not recommend it. Only offer it if we want it.
>Here's some more links. I think the main problem is that the vaccine is too
>new to have statistics.
>
>http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hpv-vacc...ens-paralysis/
>
>http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hpv-vacc...ens-paralysis/

You posted these links previously and twice again. Read more than the
media headlines. The story behind the "catch your attention"
headlines is that over 8 million women have had the shots. Doctors
say that there is no evidence that the people in question wouldn't
have had the paralysis from other causes; they can find no link. You
should read this stuff before you make conclusions and post.
Janet US

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 10:24:51 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> > wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 12:59:45 PM UTC-4, Gary wrote:
>> > barbie gee wrote:
>> > >
>> > > and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone
>> > > with
>> > > cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
>> > > exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
>> >
>> > I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
>> > not?
>>
>> I can't speak for Barbie Gee, but I haven't gotten it BECAUSE IT DIDN'T
>> EXIST UNTIL AFTER I BECAME SEXUALLY ACTIVE. No point locking the barn
>> door after the horse is stolen.
>>
>> Sorry for shouting. Some things just seem so painfully self-evident
>> that I fly right off the handle.
>>
>
> You said what the rest of us were thinking.

That part was obvious. But take it to the next step. How many of us here who
did not get the shot, got HPV? Ha!

"Cheri" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Julie Bove" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Roy" > wrote in message
>
>>> Are you nuts?...it is VERY important to have the HPV vaccination. Of
>>> course YOUR child or children are not in danger as they are good
>>> Christian and moral beings and will never be promiscuous. Wake up lady
>>> and smell the flowers, its a new world out there.
>>> ====
>>
>> Wrong. If it were that important, then it would be added to the lists of
>> required shots. It's not. It's controversial.
>>
>> We're not Christians. Just stuff it.
>
> He obviously knows nothing about your religious beliefs, just popping off
> and making stuff up.

Seems that way.

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Janet wrote:
>>
>> The HPV vaccine is part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme and
>> is routinely offered to secondary school girls aged 12 and 13.
>> It's a safe vaccine and...
>
> I'll bet you never got one and YOU are still alive. Who are you to
> talk?
>
> Don't pick on Julie for this. If anything, it should be Angela's
> decision and her's alone. She's old enough to decide.

Yes. I try to be the type of parent who does not control my kid. I let her
make her own decisions. She didn't want a senior portrait taken and her
school has no yearbook. I would have liked the pic but she didn't want it so
I'm fine with that. I was forced into doing things that I didn't want to and
they served no good reason. I won't do that to her.

Also, based on her bad reactions to meds, no Dr. in their right mind would
recommend this for her.

"Janet B" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 12:53:31 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>>Janet wrote:
>>>
>>> The HPV vaccine is part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme and
>>> is routinely offered to secondary school girls aged 12 and 13.
>>> It's a safe vaccine and...
>>
>>I'll bet you never got one and YOU are still alive. Who are you to
>>talk?
>>
>>Don't pick on Julie for this. If anything, it should be Angela's
>>decision and her's alone. She's old enough to decide.
>
> Do you know why the Janet's have not gotten this vaccine? Thought
> not. You better read up on it. BTW, no one is picking on Julie for
> this. We are pointing out her 'facts' are not facts.
> Again. You need to do some reading from some real sources, not scare
> sources or blogs. You are a skeptic, that's good. But before you
> form a solid opinion or give advice, you need to be fully informed.
> Janet US

Actually you are picking on me. And none of you have a child of this age.
You only know what you read somewhere. I'm living this.

"Janet B" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 13:47:52 -0500, jinx the minx >
> wrote:
>
>>Gary > wrote:
>>> Janet B wrote:
>>>> BTW, no one is picking on Julie for
>>>> this. We are pointing out her 'facts' are not facts.
>>>
>>> No..You are definitely Julie bashing here. Get real. You don't know
>>> any facts any more than she does. It's all a fairly new vaccine and
>>> theory at this point. Again though, her daughter is old enough to
>>> decide for herself and that's none of your concern.
>>>
>>> You don't need the vaccine because you don't "get any" anymore. Take
>>> that, smarty pants.
>>>
>>
>>I'm not entirely sure you understand how HPV exposure and cervical cancer
>>works?? More specifically, what the shot even does? Do you also think no
>>one needs the polio vaccine because no one gets polio anymore??!!
>
> I suspect you are right that he doesn't understand. How's this?
> Do most people who are sexually active get exposed to HPV? Yes
> Do most people who have HPV know that they have it? No
> Are some people more at risk with an HPV infection? Yes
> Do the results of an HPV infection show up immediately? Yes and No
> Can the results of an HPV infection show up years later? Yes
>
> Janet US

And do most people who have HPV suffer from it? No. Move along here. Nothing
to see.

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> wrote:
>>
>> Gary wrote:
>> >Don't pick on Julie for this. If anything, it should be Angela's
>> >decision and her's alone. She's old enough to decide.
>>
>> Except teens all know they are invincible, until something happens.
>
> Finally...a valid comment. At this point, Julie could advise but it's
> still up to her daughter to decide for herself. She's old enough to do
> the research herself.
>
> Very sadly, I've recently learned that I have "extended deceased
> ferret syndrome." No one ever warned me of this. No known vaccine
> either, that I've heard of. I'm still waiting for "time to heal."

We did research. We're not stupid.

On 01/06/2016 4:54 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 15:24:47 -0400, Dave Smith
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> I am not sure if it is extremely sad or extremely amusing that she
>>> rejects every piece of valid advice and information here but is a sponge
>>> for nonsense factoids.
>>
>> It's not amusing to see such an easy cancer (genital warts etc)
>> prevention being summarily dismissed like that.
>
> Please explain how it is easy. You think the very specific timing of
> three shots over the course of a 6 month period is easy? This is partly
> why such a small percentage of people have completed it. Statistics seem
> to vary on this depending on the source but it is somewhere around 30
> percent who have had all three. Don't have all three? Might not have
> even bothered for the first one.

And that is your reason for not letting your daughter have the shot?
Sheesh!!!!

On 01/06/2016 4:51 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "graham" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 01/06/2016 11:19 AM, Gary wrote:
>>> Janet B wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:00:23 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> barbie gee wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and those of you not recommending the vaccine haven't seen someone
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> cervical cancer, or the men who get tonsil or throat cancer from HPV
>>>>>> exposure (and no, they're not all homosexual men).
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm willing to bet YOU have also never gotten this vaccination. Why
>>>>> not?
>>>>
>>>> Have you? Why not?
>>>> Janet US
>>>
>>> No, I haven't gotten one and I don't care about one.
>>> I'm good and no one needs to pick on Julie about it either.
>>>
>> We are not picking on her! We are trying to help her see straight!
>
> My eyes are not crossed.

But the wiring in the logic circuit in your brain clearly is!

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 14:09:16 +0100, Janet > wrote:
>
>> In article >, says...
>> >
>> >
>> > Wrong. If it were that important, then it would be added to the lists
>> > of
>> > required shots. It's not.
>>
>> It is, in UK
>>
>> http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccina...ges/hpv-human-
>> papillomavirus-vaccine.aspx
>>
>> "All girls aged 12 to 13 are offered HPV (human papilloma virus)
>> vaccination as part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme. The
>> vaccine protects against cervical cancer. It's usually given to girls in
>> year eight at schools in England.
>>
>> According to Cancer Research UK, cervical cancer is the second
>> mostcommon cancer in women under the age of 35.
>> Which girls should have the HPV vaccination?
>>
>> The HPV vaccine is part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme and
>> is routinely offered to secondary school girls aged 12 and 13.
>> It's a safe vaccine and there are very few girls who aren't suitable for
>> HPV vaccination. However, special precautions may need to be taken for
>> girls with certain health conditio
>
> ns, or who have ever had a severe
>> allergic reaction (anaphylaxis).
>>
>> Read more about who should have the HPV vaccine."
>> HPV vaccine safety
>>
>> http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vaccina...cine-cervarix-
>> gardasil-safety.aspx
>>
>>
>> janet UK
>
> A HMO called Kaiser Permanente (which operates in California;
> Colorado; Georgia; Hawaii; Maryland; Oregon; Virginia; Washington;
> Washington D.C.) has it on their list too. I texted my DIL to see if
> my 14 YO grandson had gotten it yet and she says he did.
>
> http://kff.org/womens-health-policy/...ss-and-use-in/
>
> According to that document
>
> The federal Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
> recommends that all girls and boys get vaccinated at age 11 or 12, and
> that girls and women ages 13-26 and boys and men ages 13-21 be given a
> "catch-up" vaccination. The vaccine is recommended for use in men
> ages 22-26 if they have not been previously vaccinated, are
> immunocompromised, or engage in sexual activity with other men. ACIP
> recommended the vaccine for females in 2006 and added the
> recommendation for males in 2011. ACIP recommended the new HPV vaccine
> in February 2015 for females ages 9-26 and boys ages 9-15. Off label
> use for the new vaccine for males ages 16-21 is allowed, and a
> recommendation for this age group is expected to follow in the coming
> years.
>
> I don't know if Julie expects a social worker to knock on her door and
> tell her to vaccinate her child or what. Apparently an easy way to
> prevent certain forms of cancer isn't of any concern.

Nobody is going to show up here. As I said... Her Dr. said he could not
recommend it. Neither could he not recommend it. He said for us to do
research and decide. We did. Now let it go. It's no an easy way. It's a
controversial vaccine based on the bad things it can do to people and we
actually do know one of those people. Nothing will change my mind on this
one. You're clueless. Move along..

"jinx the minx" > wrote in message
...
> sf > wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 14:09:16 +0100, Janet > wrote:
>>
>>> In article >, says...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Wrong. If it were that important, then it would be added to the lists
>>>> of
>>>> required shots. It's not.
>>>
>>> It is, in UK
>>>
>>> http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccina...ges/hpv-human-
>>> papillomavirus-vaccine.aspx
>>>
>>> "All girls aged 12 to 13 are offered HPV (human papilloma virus)
>>> vaccination as part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme. The
>>> vaccine protects against cervical cancer. It's usually given to girls in
>>> year eight at schools in England.
>>>
>>> According to Cancer Research UK, cervical cancer is the second
>>> mostcommon cancer in women under the age of 35.
>>> Which girls should have the HPV vaccination?
>>>
>>> The HPV vaccine is part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme and
>>> is routinely offered to secondary school girls aged 12 and 13.
>>> It's a safe vaccine and there are very few girls who aren't suitable for
>>> HPV vaccination. However, special precautions may need to be taken for
>>> girls with certain health conditio
>>
>> ns, or who have ever had a severe
>>> allergic reaction (anaphylaxis).
>>>
>>> Read more about who should have the HPV vaccine."
>>> HPV vaccine safety
>>>
>>> http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vaccina...cine-cervarix-
>>> gardasil-safety.aspx
>>>
>>>
>>> janet UK
>>
>> A HMO called Kaiser Permanente (which operates in California;
>> Colorado; Georgia; Hawaii; Maryland; Oregon; Virginia; Washington;
>> Washington D.C.) has it on their list too. I texted my DIL to see if
>> my 14 YO grandson had gotten it yet and she says he did.
>>
>> http://kff.org/womens-health-policy/...ss-and-use-in/
>>
>> According to that document
>>
>> The federal Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
>> recommends that all girls and boys get vaccinated at age 11 or 12, and
>> that girls and women ages 13-26 and boys and men ages 13-21 be given a
>> “catch-up” vaccination. The vaccine is recommended for use in men
>> ages 22-26 if they have not been previously vaccinated, are
>> immunocompromised, or engage in sexual activity with other men. ACIP
>> recommended the vaccine for females in 2006 and added the
>> recommendation for males in 2011. ACIP recommended the new HPV vaccine
>> in February 2015 for females ages 9-26 and boys ages 9-15. Off label
>> use for the new vaccine for males ages 16-21 is allowed, and a
>> recommendation for this age group is expected to follow in the coming
>> years.
>>
>> I don't know if Julie expects a social worker to knock on her door and
>> tell her to vaccinate her child or what. Apparently an easy way to
>> prevent certain forms of cancer isn't of any concern.
>>
>
> I'm not sure what kind of logic (or not) was used to decide the unproven
> risk of paralysis outweighs the proven risk of getting cancer.

Well, we're sure and that's all that matters. I'm not putting my kid's
entire medical history up here for you to peruse. I did contact a couple of
people here in the past year to explain some things to them. I am really
sick of people saying hurtful things to me, especially when it comes to my
kid. I don't go around telling people what to do. I don't know why so many
here feel the need to do so. We did what we felt was right and we did
discuss this with the Dr. Done deal. Move along.

On 01/06/2016 5:06 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "Gary" > wrote in message
> ...
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Gary wrote:
>>> >Don't pick on Julie for this. If anything, it should be Angela's
>>> >decision and her's alone. She's old enough to decide.
>>>
>>> Except teens all know they are invincible, until something happens.
>>
>> Finally...a valid comment. At this point, Julie could advise but it's
>> still up to her daughter to decide for herself. She's old enough to do
>> the research herself.
>>
>> Very sadly, I've recently learned that I have "extended deceased
>> ferret syndrome." No one ever warned me of this. No known vaccine
>> either, that I've heard of. I'm still waiting for "time to heal."
>
> We did research. We're not stupid.

The jury is out on that!

"Janet B" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 15:24:46 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"barbie gee" > wrote in message
>>news:alpine.DEB.2.02.1606011034570.26985@sghcrg. sghcrg.pbz...
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> On Tue, 31 May 2016 09:19:08 -0600, graham > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 31/05/2016 4:45 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "graham" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> On 30/05/2016 4:09 PM, Roy wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, May 30, 2016 at 2:25:00 PM UTC-6, graham wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 30/05/2016 1:30 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "l not -l" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29-May-2016, "Julie Bove" > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, May 29, 2016 at 1:18:55 PM UTC-5, Jill McQuown
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When Mom was alive she kept seeing ads for probiotics. She
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "What's that?" Beats me, but be assured they're trying to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sell
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yogurt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jill
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Probiotics have more good bacteria than just plain
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yogurt. I learned they can REALLY help with severe
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gut issues that for some unfathomable reason I was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plagued with 2 years ago two or three times. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> take a probiotic capsule daily and that misery seems
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be a thing of the past. Don't know what brought it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on either.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We now know that one reason for the appendix is that it's a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> natural
>>>>>>>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of probiotics. People who have had theirs removed, need to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> supplement.
>>>>>>>>>>>> How do we know this, an article in Prevention, or similar,
>>>>>>>>>>>> magazine or
>>>>>>>>>>>> peer-reviewed, published research? It seems odd that if this
>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>> true
>>>>>>>>>>>> medical knowledge, that no doctor has suggested probiotics to
>>>>>>>>>>>> me
>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>> the 66
>>>>>>>>>>>> years I have been without an appendix (removed as a young
>>>>>>>>>>>> child).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> My naturopath first told me this.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Naturopaths are quacks. If you believe him, you'll believe
>>>>>>>>>> anything!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +++ on the quacks...one of my daughters believes what they say
>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>> vaccinations and refuses to get her son immunized against any of
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> nasty diseases. She will not listen to reason...must have
>>>>>>>>> inherited
>>>>>>>>> that from her mother. Too bad, because immunization has been
>>>>>>>>> proven
>>>>>>>>> to be effective for eons.
>>>>>>>>> ====
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How awful for you!
>>>>>>>> I'm fortunate in that regard as both sets of my grandchildren have
>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>> the appropriate jabs - including my grandson having the HPV jab.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hadn't heard of that. I had to look it up!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> They gave it to girls at first then they realised that boys can
>>>>>> become
>>>>>> carriers too.
>>>>>> Graham
>>>>>
>>>>> the overall problem is that if it isn't received at an early enough
>>>>> age, it is too late. Because either the girl will become sexually
>>>>> active and exposed or if 'pure', chances are her husband will have
>>>>> been exposed. I would really be angry at my mother if she left me
>>>>> open to cancer when there was a good way to avoid it.
>>>>> Janet US
>>>>
>>>> The vaccine can cause paralysis. Not a chance I'm willing to take.
>>>
>>> citation, and frequency of this adverse affect per total number of those
>>> vaccinated, please.
>>
>>I don't have those statistics. I did put up links. The Drs. we see say
>>that
>>they can only offer the vaccine. It is up to us to do research. They can
>>not
>>recommend it. Nor can they not recommend it. Only offer it if we want it.
>>Here's some more links. I think the main problem is that the vaccine is
>>too
>>new to have statistics.
>>
>>http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hpv-vacc...ens-paralysis/
>>
>>http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hpv-vacc...ens-paralysis/
>
> You posted these links previously and twice again. Read more than the
> media headlines. The story behind the "catch your attention"
> headlines is that over 8 million women have had the shots. Doctors
> say that there is no evidence that the people in question wouldn't
> have had the paralysis from other causes; they can find no link. You
> should read this stuff before you make conclusions and post.
> Janet US

We're done, Janet. You and I are clearly on different planes despite our age
difference.

"graham" > wrote in message
...
> On 01/06/2016 4:54 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 15:24:47 -0400, Dave Smith
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am not sure if it is extremely sad or extremely amusing that she
>>>> rejects every piece of valid advice and information here but is a
>>>> sponge
>>>> for nonsense factoids.
>>>
>>> It's not amusing to see such an easy cancer (genital warts etc)
>>> prevention being summarily dismissed like that.
>>
>> Please explain how it is easy. You think the very specific timing of
>> three shots over the course of a 6 month period is easy? This is partly
>> why such a small percentage of people have completed it. Statistics seem
>> to vary on this depending on the source but it is somewhere around 30
>> percent who have had all three. Don't have all three? Might not have
>> even bothered for the first one.
>
> And that is your reason for not letting your daughter have the shot?
> Sheesh!!!!

No. That is not the reason at all. We're done. You can't fix stupid.

"Janet B" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:54:36 -0700, sf > wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 14:09:16 +0100, Janet > wrote:
>>
>>> In article >, says...
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Wrong. If it were that important, then it would be added to the lists
>>> > of
>>> > required shots. It's not.
>>>
>>> It is, in UK
>>>
>>> http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccina...ges/hpv-human-
>>> papillomavirus-vaccine.aspx
>>>
>>> "All girls aged 12 to 13 are offered HPV (human papilloma virus)
>>> vaccination as part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme. The
>>> vaccine protects against cervical cancer. It's usually given to girls in
>>> year eight at schools in England.
>>>
>>> According to Cancer Research UK, cervical cancer is the second
>>> mostcommon cancer in women under the age of 35.
>>> Which girls should have the HPV vaccination?
>>>
>>> The HPV vaccine is part of the NHS childhood vaccination programme and
>>> is routinely offered to secondary school girls aged 12 and 13.
>>> It's a safe vaccine and there are very few girls who aren't suitable for
>>> HPV vaccination. However, special precautions may need to be taken for
>>> girls with certain health conditio
>>
>>ns, or who have ever had a severe
>>> allergic reaction (anaphylaxis).
>>>
>>> Read more about who should have the HPV vaccine."
>>> HPV vaccine safety
>>>
>>> http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vaccina...cine-cervarix-
>>> gardasil-safety.aspx
>>>
>>>
>>> janet UK
>>
>>A HMO called Kaiser Permanente (which operates in California;
>>Colorado; Georgia; Hawaii; Maryland; Oregon; Virginia; Washington;
>>Washington D.C.) has it on their list too. I texted my DIL to see if
>>my 14 YO grandson had gotten it yet and she says he did.
>>
>>http://kff.org/womens-health-policy/...ss-and-use-in/
>>
>>According to that document
>>
>>The federal Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
>>recommends that all girls and boys get vaccinated at age 11 or 12, and
>>that girls and women ages 13-26 and boys and men ages 13-21 be given a
>>"catch-up" vaccination. The vaccine is recommended for use in men
>>ages 22-26 if they have not been previously vaccinated, are
>>immunocompromised, or engage in sexual activity with other men. ACIP
>>recommended the vaccine for females in 2006 and added the
>>recommendation for males in 2011. ACIP recommended the new HPV vaccine
>>in February 2015 for females ages 9-26 and boys ages 9-15. Off label
>>use for the new vaccine for males ages 16-21 is allowed, and a
>>recommendation for this age group is expected to follow in the coming
>>years.
>>
>>I don't know if Julie expects a social worker to knock on her door and
>>tell her to vaccinate her child or what. Apparently an easy way to
>>prevent certain forms of cancer isn't of any concern.
>
> She believes that it is the drug companies that are spinning the
> vaccine and creating the story. She says so upstream. I think that
> means there isn't really a problem
> Janet US

From what I have seen, you don't think.

On 6/1/2016 12:37 PM, Gary wrote:

>
> IMO, it's a mistake for people to run and get the newest nifty
> vaccines. At least give it a time test first. I never rush right out
> for the newest Windows update. They always find problems later.
>
> I'm with Julie on resisting that vaccine. At least let her daughter
> decide.
>

Why? The people here at RFC are the ones to decide family matters.
Collectively we know what is best for her.

On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 16:04:55 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>
>"Janet B" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 13:47:52 -0500, jinx the minx >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Gary > wrote:
>>>> Janet B wrote:
>>>>> BTW, no one is picking on Julie for
>>>>> this. We are pointing out her 'facts' are not facts.
>>>>
>>>> No..You are definitely Julie bashing here. Get real. You don't know
>>>> any facts any more than she does. It's all a fairly new vaccine and
>>>> theory at this point. Again though, her daughter is old enough to
>>>> decide for herself and that's none of your concern.
>>>>
>>>> You don't need the vaccine because you don't "get any" anymore. Take
>>>> that, smarty pants.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I'm not entirely sure you understand how HPV exposure and cervical cancer
>>>works?? More specifically, what the shot even does? Do you also think no
>>>one needs the polio vaccine because no one gets polio anymore??!!
>>
>> I suspect you are right that he doesn't understand. How's this?
>> Do most people who are sexually active get exposed to HPV? Yes
>> Do most people who have HPV know that they have it? No
>> Are some people more at risk with an HPV infection? Yes
>> Do the results of an HPV infection show up immediately? Yes and No
>> Can the results of an HPV infection show up years later? Yes
>>
>> Janet US
>
>And do most people who have HPV suffer from it? No. Move along here. Nothing
>to see.

They just become spreaders and carriers and cause the suffering and
death of others.
Janet US

Janet wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> In article >, says...
> >
> > Janet wrote:
> > >
> > > In article >, says...
> > > >
> > > > Janet B wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > All medications come with fact sheets that lay out possible
> > > > > side effects. My grandsons have had the shots.
> > > >
> > > > Have you ever read those fact sheets though. They'll scare you
> > > > away from anything that you have to take. Even new drug
> > > > commercials spend more time telling you about the side effects
> > > > rather than the benefits.
> > > >
> > > > IMO, this new vaccine should be up to the young teens.
> > >
> > > Most 12 yr olds have no concept of their own vulnerability to
> > > the commonest STD in USA; and you can hardly expect them to
> > > grasp it might kill them in one of several particularly horrible
> > > ways. Kids might "know" that people die from smoking, drugs,
> > > alcohol; but they are so sure it won't happen to them they do
> > > that stuff anyway.
> > >
> > > They are almost
> > > > adults and should be given the option whether to take them or
> > > > not. Of course, some teens are NOT sexually active so they
> > > > don't need the vaccine until they do start having sex.
> > >
> > > You miss the point. Young teens might not be having
> > > penetrative intercourse, but they may be open-mouth kissing and
> > > mutually masturbating, and HPV can be transmitted by both.
> > > >
> > > > It's a fairly new drug and very untested as to long term
> > > > effects. I never had it and neither did you. My daughter never
> > > > got it either.
> > >
> > > Maybe you both have HPV.
> > >
> > > http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv.htm
> > >
> > > "HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI).
> > > HPV is so common that nearly all sexually active men and women
> > > get it at some point in their lives."
> > >
> > > Janet.
> >
> > Do you have it, Janet?
>
> Given the statistics of HPV prevalence I've probably had it,
> decades before vaccination was available.
>
> > Have you been vaccinated?
>
> Of course not, stupid.
>
> Janet UK

I got it in 2007-2008 or so. Military related service thing.

--

Julie Bove wrote in rec.food.cooking:

>
> "Janet B" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 03:25:32 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> >>"Janet B" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > On Tue, 31 May 2016 00:20:33 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
> > > > snip
> > > > >
> > > > > I draw the line with the HPV. Nope.
> > > >
> > > > You have the opportunity to save your daughter from cervical
> > > > cancer at the very least. Why wouldn't you?
> > > > Janet US
> > >
> > > Because I don't want to take the chance of her being paralyzed.
> > > And it's not just one shot. It's a series. I know a girl who is a
> > > year younger than her. First shot? No problem. Second shot?
> > > Wound up in the hospital and now she can't walk. The shot is
> > > controversial and the Drs. here can not recommend it. Or not, not
> > > recommend it. They merely just ask if you want it or not.
> > >
> > > http://health.usnews.com/health-news...2009/03/20/cdc
> > > -takes-closer-look-at-gardasil-and-paralysis
> > >
> > > http://kidshealth.org/en/teens/gbs-hpv.html
> > >
> > > http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hpv-vacc...ens-paralysis/
> > >
> > > There are plenty more links.
> > >
> > > My daughter is very prone to allergic reactions and side effects
> > > to things. So much so that her Drs. now don't even want to
> > > prescribe something unless it is totally necessary. I am not
> > > going to get into all of that here, but this past year wasn't
> > > pretty and she had to go see a specialist to help her recover
> > > from the side effects of a med. Thankfully that is behind us now.
> >
> > You need to respond to your daughter's health as you see fit.
> > However, the articles you post prove diddly. The headlines are in
> > reaction to a parent's blog that instigated a regular review by the
> > CDC and others. If you read the articles beyond the media
> > headlines, there is no substantiation to your claims. All point
> > out that the paralysis easily could be attributed to other causes.
> > One shot? vs. three? Why is that a big deal? It can't be
> > financial for you. I'm no math person, but the statistical
> > possibilities considering testing prior to release to public and
> > the number of shots given so far are pretty thin. All medications
> > come with fact sheets that lay out possible side effects. My
> > grandsons have had the shots. Janet US
>
> Here's what a Dr. said to us. Most kids of that age do not want one
> shot, let alone three. Most parents these days might get the kid the
> first shot but are going to forget to take them back to get the
> others. And the others have to be administered in a specific time
> frame. If they're not, they're not at all effective. That in and of
> itself means that most people are not compliant.
>
> The person we know became ill within 24 hours of the second shot.
>
> I am diabetic. I well remember the problems caused by Rezulin. And
> now Januvuia. Thankfully my Endo. is of the school that new meds are
> not necessarily something we want to use. Let them be on the market
> for 10 years or so and if they prove to be good, then try them.
>
> Pharmaceutical companies tell us all sorts of things. Doesn't mean
> they are all try. They can spin things any way they want.
>
> What I think is really odd is that the people here pushing for this
> vaccine do not have kids of an age to get it. If they did they'd
> likely be talking to other parents and getting information from the
> school like we did.

Charlotte also got the series, same time I did. No issues.

--

On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 18:29:08 -0600, Janet B >
wrote:

> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 16:04:55 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >And do most people who have HPV suffer from it? No. Move along here. Nothing
> >to see.
>
> They just become spreaders and carriers and cause the suffering and
> death of others.
> Janet US

+1

--

sf