![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
And while I am at it...
Feb. 20th, 2006 03:49 pmCervical cancer vaccine on way
NZ Herald 20/2/2006
( The usual article repetition - I like having the original text available )
It is a very good thing that they have been able to develop this vaccine and it will definitely save lives, and I hope they have the chance/ability to develop it further and extend the virus effectiveness range. There was a very good interview with the Australian (of the year) who invented it on ABC Classic FM last week.
BUT some of the attitudes of the vaccine being "a licence to be promiscuous" are just staggering. And not just in Australia. Apparetly there are those on the US christian religeous fundimentalist right who don't want to allow their daughters to be innoculated in their pre-teens (I think I ranted on this on LJ some time last year). If people are willing to let their daughters run the risk of dying earlier because they don't want to innoculate against an STD... wankers. It should be noted that one of the reasons for innoculating against Rubella around age 11 or 12 is to prevent the birth defects associated with German measles during pregnancy. Is that giving an open invitation to go out and have sex?
It is straight forward. This is a means of reducing your child's chances of dying of a particular type of cancer or transmitting something that causes it and any public debate should be damned clear on that.
NZ Herald 20/2/2006
( The usual article repetition - I like having the original text available )
It is a very good thing that they have been able to develop this vaccine and it will definitely save lives, and I hope they have the chance/ability to develop it further and extend the virus effectiveness range. There was a very good interview with the Australian (of the year) who invented it on ABC Classic FM last week.
BUT some of the attitudes of the vaccine being "a licence to be promiscuous" are just staggering. And not just in Australia. Apparetly there are those on the US christian religeous fundimentalist right who don't want to allow their daughters to be innoculated in their pre-teens (I think I ranted on this on LJ some time last year). If people are willing to let their daughters run the risk of dying earlier because they don't want to innoculate against an STD... wankers. It should be noted that one of the reasons for innoculating against Rubella around age 11 or 12 is to prevent the birth defects associated with German measles during pregnancy. Is that giving an open invitation to go out and have sex?
It is straight forward. This is a means of reducing your child's chances of dying of a particular type of cancer or transmitting something that causes it and any public debate should be damned clear on that.
