HPV Vaccination Controversy Essay examples

The human papillomavirus (HPV) is a sexually transmitted disease (STD) that is very common throughout the United States and worldwide (World Health Organization (WHO), 2016). There are over 100 different forms of the virus with 13 of these types being capable of causing cancer (WHO, 2016). HPV can lead to the development of serious health problems. Theses health problems are especially an issue for adolescent women due to the highly increasing STD rates among this age group (Kostas-Polston, Johnson-Mallard & Berman, 2012). There is a vaccine for many of the common types of HPV, however, many parents are refusing to vaccinate their daughters for various reasons. With the rising cases of STDs, less birth

The HPV vaccine reception has been similar to that of the hepatitis vaccine in that both are seen as an attack on morality, and are considered by some as a license for promiscuity. In the book Vaccine Allen quotes, ‘ “ If a 10- or 12-year-old is given a vaccine to protect against a sexually transmitted disease, then it’s implied they’d be engaging in risky sexual behavior,” said Pia de Solenni, director of “life and women’s issues” for the Family Research Council’ (433). The fact that HPV lives in the sexual organs and is spread by sexual intercourse or intravenous drug use has caused many parents to come to the belief that their children are not at risk. Some parents go so far as to suggest that if

Parents face many different decisions when raising a child; some decisions are trivial, and others can be controversial. Whether or not to vaccinate a child is one of the most controversial choices. So controversial, in fact, that there is a political conversation of making immunizations a requirement. Many people support the movement of making vaccinations mandatory. Proponents argue that vaccines save lives, vaccine-preventable diseases have not been eradicated, and vaccines protect herd immunity. Many people also disagree with the possibility of required vaccinations. Opponents argue that vaccines cause harm, immunity by vaccinations is inferior to natural immunity, and government policies should not dictate personal medical choices.

HPV vaccinations bring up many public health and ethical issues. Some states want to require vaccines for school attendance. In the academic journal article “HPV Vaccination’s Second Act: Promotion, Competition, and Compulsion”, author Jason Schwartz states that, “Although some argue that HPV vaccines should never be mandated for school attendance, the temptation for policymakers to revisit this ethical and policy debate must be resisted until HPV vaccination has successfully become a routine, trusted component of adolescent medical care” (Schwartz). This train of thought exemplifies the opposition to HPV vaccination in this country, which restricts us in immunizing possible victims as effectively as possible. If the ignorance towards the vaccine continues, there will not be a powerful impact in decreasing rates of HPV infections.

In today’s society, we believe that everything is up for debate, and that every topic can be opinionated. We like to have the power to make our own choices regardless of facts, just because we feel the pressure of being told what to do. We are lazy to learn the truth, but yet we are ready to choose sides and strongly argue about it. We see it every day on the news, in politics, sports, social media, online forums, school, etc. In his article, “Not Up for Debate: The Science Behind Vaccination”, published in September of 2015, Professor Aaron E. Carroll argues that the issue with vaccinations is more than just choosing to do it or not. Carroll jumps right into his discussion of the “Not up for debate” regarding people’s claims tying vaccines to autism, the choice not to, and officials backing them up. He explains how this argument stems from incorrect information, inadequate studies and research, and poor education about the facts and data about the vaccines, which leads to the stubborn belief that vaccinations should be banned.

Recently an anti-vaccination movement has sparked a worldwide discussion about both the safety of vaccines and the responsibility of people to vaccinate. Recent outbreaks of preventable diseases have caused both fear and anger from people on both sides of the issue. These same outbreaks have also served to cause significant political tension between those against vaccines, who do not want their right to choose compromised, and many proponents of vaccines, who are calling for mandatory vaccinations.

“You have to follow your own heart when it comes to medical decision-making,” stated author and mother Emily Matchar when voicing her opinion on childhood vaccines. When it comes to vaccine parents are given the privilege to exempt their child based on medical, religious, or philosophical values, varying by state. This has allowed many to deviate from the original meaning of these exemptions and manipulate them as they see fit. This has helped to fuel the anti-vaccine movement that pushes for parents to fully decide which vaccines their child will receive without government regulations. Since 1998, the movement has harassed the public health community. With the introduction of incomplete, faulty research that “proved” Autism Spectrum Disorder

Childhood immunization is an important factor in today’s life, which is why it is important to be aware of the facts. After reading two articles, I came up with the conclusion that Ronald Bailey’s article “Refusing Vaccination Puts Others at Risk” presents a stronger argument than Sandy Reider article “The Science Is Not Settled.” One reason Ronald Bailey’s article is stronger is that Bailey has more authority than Reider. Sandy Reider who is a MD, general practitioner and primary care doctor practiced medicine in Vermont.

Throughout the essay, Jake Johnson implements a strong satirical tone through the use of sarcasm. Exaggerating the pains of receiving vaccinations, he recounts being brutally “stabbed” in the arm, and being “drugged with a dose of Hepatitis B vaccine”. Growing older, he becomes an “observant to this abomination of human rights”. On the surface, Johnson’s extreme explanation of vaccinations seem as if he is against them. However, quite the contrary is true. This extreme language acts as

This paper was written for MLS 500: Graduate Research and Writing taught by Dr. Kyla Hammond

The current issue I have selected to discuss is vaccinations. In particular, I will be addressing the anti-vaccination movement that has gained popularity in recent years and the contributing biases that influenced its emergence. One event stands out at as a major contributing factor to the growth of the anti-vaccination movement, the 1998 study by Andrew Wakefield that was published by the English medical journal, Lancet. This study claimed to show a connection between the MMR vaccine and autism. Even though it was just one small study, the media picked it up and it became hugely publicized.

However, shouldn’t it be a woman’s choice if they choose the 70% of cervical cancers or the 0.05% risk? However, the bottom line is that their choice to be vaccinated could save everyone. It’s a simple concept; herd immunity. When everyone is vaccinated, the vaccine is far more effective. One example of herd immunity is polio. Nowadays, polio is not a real threat to the people of the United States because essentially, we are all immune. However, during the 1960’s, this was definitely not the case. Eventually as a vaccine for polio was developed, the virus became far less prevalent because people were being vaccinated. But, do you think that every single person in the United States got vaccinated? No. However, a majority of people did until there was no way or source for the people who were unprotected from the virus to contract it. This same event can occur for HPV. If we make this vaccine mandatory for 11-12 year old girls, before they’re sexually active, the number of people who could pass on the virus would be less and less, until we eliminate the strains of HPV that cause cervical cancer.

In Amy Wallace’s article “An Epidemic of Fear: How Panicked Parents Skipping Shots Endangers Us All” a majority of parents in America have come to believe and accept the ideology that vaccination is an unnecessary greed and actually the cause for autism in children. In her article Wallace fights against this misconception and tries to persuade her readers that vaccines are not only crucial for the health of children, but also harmless. Wallace writes a persuasive article regarding the importance of vaccination and disproves the theory of them being the causation of autism, by presenting convincing data, statistics and brings attention to faulty appeal to authority. Wallace also appeals to authority that persuades those who already agree with her argument though her use of such a public figure alienates her target audience.

In an online survey, the survey administrator and his team asked over fifteen hundred parents of 11-17 year old children whether they agreed that laws requiring HPV vaccination for sixth grade school entry were “a good idea” about half of the parent believed the HPV vaccine, was at least as important as the Tdap and Meningococcal vaccines, the other two recommended for adolescent, only forty percent believed the vaccine prevented cervical cancer. Nearly a quarter of the parents inaccurately believed the vaccine might cause long term health problems and one

The Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the virus responsible for cervical cancer. It is one the most common viral sexually transmitted infections. A vaccine was approved in 2006 that is effective in preventing the types of HPV responsible for 70% of cervical cancers and 90% of genital warts. Proposals for routine and mandatory HPV vaccination of girls have become sources of controversy for parents of school-aged youth, legislators, members of the medical community, and the public at large (Cooper et al. 2010).