Guardyourself
I really don't know what to think about this very aggressive and sudden marketing campaign for a new drug that will supposedly prevent cervical cancer. The drug itself is called "Gardasil" and a quick google for information about it will get you this result:
Hunh?Guardawhat?NeverHeardOfIt
Another google search brings up this:
Whatever this drug is really all about, the marketing campaign for it has definitely become a news story worth pursuing. (Of course, I'm not a REAL journalist, so what the hell do I know - right? It's just that, given the record of Big Pharma, it is truly something to witness its representatives and spokespersons react as if they are not only shocked and appalled by the public's reluctance to take them at their word that this is a good thing they're doing here - but hurt, genuinely hurt.
I don't know about you, Dear Reader, but I find that even more "suspicion arousing" than usual.
In the meantime, another thing that has me wondering, is that Stephen Harper's New Conservative Government seems to be solidly behind this campaign to innoculate girls PRIOR to sexual activity against what is essentially an STD - the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV)
WITH FUNDING AND EVERYTHING!!!!
SkipTheOtherLinks - READ THIS!!
Anyway, I'm all for ways to protect women from cervical cancer, but it used to be that we could count on Pap Smears. Unfortunately, thanks to all the contracting out to private labs that goes on in our publicly funded healthcare system these days, we PROBABLY no longer can - American women being the guinea pigs in this case:
I'm not a REAL doctor, but my understanding of cervical cancer is that, caught early through Pap Smear screening (and everybody I know goes once a year for hers and has since she was "of age" - if only to get her pill prescription renewed) - it is highly treatable.
In other words - as long as the testing is being done and the results reported back to your doctor, it is very unlikely you will die of cervical cancer.
So, okay. Merck Frosst says it has a better idea, a drug that can be given to girls in three installments that will protect them from four strains of the virus that can lead to cervical cancer - if left untreated. But whoa, just don't question them on it:
Okay1forMacleans0forMerckFrosst
See? That's just the sort of thing that makes me think, "Hm... maybe I don't WANT to have this stuff injected into my daughters, afterall..."
But I don't really know what from what - I just know I'd no more take Merck Frosst's word for anything than try bungee jumping at the Landsdowne Ex. Because ever since HPV became the STDs of STDs, I've had a couple of abnormal Pap Smears that then are normal again the next go'round and one very hard sell recommendation after an abnormal one that I be vaccinated against HPV. My response was, "But surely I've been exposed to it already (some 99.9% of sexually active people have been, it seems) and besides, I come for regular Pap Smears to detect early signs of cervical cancer in order that it can be caught early and treated."
Well, that was met with a heavy sigh, I can tell you. But not wanting the doctor to feel I was dismissing his medical expertise out of hand, I posed a question to him I had been meaning to ask someone in the know for a couple of years, "I'm on a low dose birth control pill so I don't get pregnant, but I was wondering - how will I know when I don't need to be on it because menopause has happened while I was taking it?"
And I kid you not, this is what he said - pleased to be asked (I could tell) for his medical opinion about a popular drug for women d'une certaine age who are sexually active with non-vasectomied partners and who don't want to get pregnant because they're too damn old: "Ooh. Good question. I don't know the answer."
And yes, you may wonder why I am taking a drug that yaddayaddablahblah - well, here's why: Our family doctor is on it and she's a few years older'n me, leads a more stressful life, and carries a little more weight. I figure, she hasn't dropped dead from a stroke - enh. I'll take my chances. But I've had half a life already. My daughters? I dunno. I'm just not comfortable enough taking Merck Frosst's word for it that Gardasil is safe.
You know what I really wish would happen? I wish some journalists would devote themselves to this story for a month or so and get the straight skinny - as straight a skinny as they can - and let me know: Should I have my teenaged daughters innoculated against HPV? Or not?
I'll take your best advice. I really will. Because I'm not against having them innoculated, I just honestly haven't trusted anybody connected to the healthcare system to be straight with me on Gardasil.
