Gardasil Grates on My Good Nature

This morning, I ran across this story:  "Mothers of Gardasil-Injured Girls Issue Challenge to Doctors".

Gardasil is a controversial cervical cancer vaccine which probably doesn't do what it says it does and probably does do what it says it doesn't. That is to say, there is little evidence that it actually prevents cervical cancer, and there is mounting evidence (most of which is denied by the mainstream medical community) that it causes harm to the girls who receive it.

Quick side note: I see this as a pro-life issue because a) the Gardasil philosophy assumes young girls are having sex outside of marriage, and b) those who make that assumption downplay the significance and essential nature of marriage, and c) that opens the door to the homosexual agenda.

Back to Gardasil et al.: I'm extreme in my anti-vaccine views. No apologies. So I was against Gardasil from the get-go. I read enough about it that I felt my objections were justified, and did not pursue it. Then I took my teen-age daughter to the doctor.

The doctor visit was due to problems she was having with her ankles. But the doctor could not resist presenting the idea of the Gardasil vaccine. He did NOT actually mention it to me directly; he looked at my daughter and addressed her as he described it. I interrupted, saying, "I am SO against that vaccine." He ignored me and continued to talk to her, handing her a brochure about it.

Besides the fact that he was out of order, the things he said to her were outrageously illogical.

He said that cervical cancer could be caused by a virus that can be passed through sexual intercourse. My daughter was 16 years old at the time, and I can guarantee you that she had not had (and still has not had) sexual intercourse with anyone. The doctor continued, "So someday, you might want to be married, and you would want to have this protection." Well, she's not married now, buddy. She's not having sex now. And she does not even see your thinly-veiled implication that she is "sexually active".

The brochure was a shameless example of emotional manipulation aimed at mothers. The glossy photo on the front showed a loving mom and young-teen daughter exchanging smiles and a hug. I don't remember all the words, and I threw the thing away in disgust. But I do remember the message: if you REALLY care about your daughter, you will have her vaccinated.

But what's the real message here? The real message is this: your daughter is going to have sex, so protect her from cancer now! And by the way, if you do this, we'll make lots of money.

Yes, I do believe Gardasil is primarily about money. The perpetrators of this hoax play on our fears of cancer and our emotional attachment to our innocent and vulnerable daughters. Why wouldn't we put out the cash (or have our insurance companies do it) for this vaccine!? What a horrible mother I am. I did not have my daughter vaccinated.

I thought about writing a letter to that doctor, and complaining to his superiors. A little research showed me, however, that in Oregon, a doctor is allowed to talk to a minor about any drugs related to sex. And clearly Gardasil is related to sex. So he could justify his "conversation" with her - in my presence and even after I had voiced objections! - by virtue of his legal right as a doctor to "inform" her.

Notice that he told her nothing of the potential side effects. This is not "informing". This is proselytizing.

See also the Truth About Gardasil website.