I want to strongly second what both Henry Miller and Adam Keiper argue below.
The means by which Rick Perry sought to add the HPV vaccine to the list of required vaccinations in Texas was certainly peculiar, and combined with his links to a Merck lobbyist it raises some questions that he should address more seriously than he has. And while the HPV vaccine is not an absolutely obvious candidate for mandatory vaccination (HPV and its very serious associated cancer risks are not, as Miller suggests, “childhood illnesses,” though I see no persuasive reason not to warmly welcome the opportunity to protect people from them as early as possible), adding it to the list of required vaccines, especially with a broad parental opt-out, strikes me as well within the bounds of reasonable public policy. A sensible, indeed essential, reticence about sending the wrong message to young girls does not seem to me to readily translate into an unwillingness to protect women (young and formerly young) from a deadly cancer. It’s hard to imagine that the risk of cervical cancer is what keeps even one young woman in America from premarital sex today, or that a lessening of that risk would at all diminish the ranks of those who choose to wait—especially if parents can easily opt out.
Virginia’s vaccination law, for instance, which mandates the HPV vaccine for 6th-grade girls but gives parents a no-questions-asked opportunity to pass on the shot, seems perfectly appropriate. In practical terms, it’s basically an opt-in policy: Parents have to take their daughters to the doctor to get vaccinated, and if they don’t want to they just send a signed form in to school. The only reason it’s called an opt-out and not an opt-in is that such a designation is required in order to have the vaccine covered by Medicaid and some private insurance. That approach is much like what Perry sought to do in Texas, but it was enacted through the regular legislative process, rather than rushed through by an awkward executive order.
Whatever you think about the mandate debate, though, there is no excuse for Michelle Bachmann’s preposterously ill-informed assertion about the risks of the vaccine. After the debate, Bachmann told Fox News that “there’s a woman who came up crying to me tonight after the debate. She said her daughter was given that vaccine. She told me her daughter suffered mental retardation as a result. There are very dangerous consequences.”
That is beyond ridiculous, and it is profoundly irresponsible. There is no evidence to support any link between this (or any) vaccine and mental retardation. None. Baseless assertions to the contrary about various vaccines have for years been piling needless guilt upon the parents of children with autism and other disorders, and driving other parents away from vaccinating their children against diseases that could do them great harm. A presidential candidate should not be engaging in such harmful nonsense.
The rashness of Perry’s move to mandate the vaccine, and the at times excessive zeal of Merck’s campaign to see it mandated, have surely contributed to this frenzy. Some of us even saw it coming several years ago. But none of that excuses Bachmann’s reckless conspiracy mongering.
My understanding is that the earliest the vaccines is given (eg, to 12-year-olds) the more effective it is later on (eg, women in their 20s).* This has nothing to do with teaching sex to 12-year-olds, as Santorum seemed to suggest. And Bachmann's insinuation of corruption was just dirty politics.
*But who knows. I'm no doctor. I think I read that somewhere, though.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseProvide a citation please, because this makes no sense to me.
The vaccine was approved by the FDA in 2007 -- four years ago. How long before the vaccine wears off? 5 years? 10 years? Because the vaccine is so new, I don't think anyone really knows.
Suppose it lasts 10 years. If so, then a girl receiving it at age 9 will have zero protection when she turns 19. I would rather my 10-year old daughter be protected from, say, age 16 to 26 rather than 9 to 19. The probability that my daughter will become sexually active prior to age 16 is very low.
Is it really good public policy to encourage girls to receive vaccination years before they are likely to become sexually active?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseConspiracy mongering is exactly right. This is what kept me from becoming a tea partier even though I shared many of the same conservative convictions, the fact that my Tea Party friends filled my email inbox with conspiracy claptrap really put me off.
I thought Michelle Bachman was pandering to the worst instincts of the Tea Party last night. I lost a lot of respect that I formerly held for her.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm a tea partier, hardly a conspiracy theorist, and not likely to be one. But really, there is no "Tea Party". So don't disassociate yourself from the movement because of wackjobs. Keep after the pols, stay active, and don't join any fringe groups spouting nonsense. Remember, even under the banner of the Republican Party, their are fringe groups.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf your Tea Party email friends did not harbor such thoughts well before 2009 I'll eat any hat in your house.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYeah, I didn't go to any Tea Party rallies either, but people like you and I should have.
The reason is that a grass roots organization is, by nature, ripe to be overtaken by snake oil merchants. Most of the people there are new to politics and easily sold. If you're someone who can explain why the conspiracy theory is bunk, you can prevent that.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI consider myself a tea partier, not formally, but I generally agree with the tea party.
That said, I agree with what you've said, and I agree that there is a flavor of conspiracy theorists in the tea party that do it no favors.
Limited government, low taxes, limited regulations, and balancing the budgets are all things I stand for, and I think those are the core tenants of the Tea Party. They best way to mold the Tea Party around those tenants and away from nutty vaccine conspiracy kooks, is to involve yourself and shape it and call out people like Bachmann who make the movement look foolish.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"It’s hard to imagine that the risk of cervical cancer is what keeps even one young woman in America from premarital sex today, or that a lessening of that risk would at all diminish the ranks of those who choose to wait—especially if parents can easily opt out."
Here's the thing: It doesn't matter if the young woman engages in premarital sex or waits to have sex until she's married. What matters is whether her partner/husband is a virgin, too.
A woman who's a virgin until her wedding night (ie, she did everything "right") can still contract HPV if her partner didn't wait. What then?
Would we make boys subject to a vaccine, if it were available?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBachman, unfortunately, is the person who is acting 'retarded'.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt's stuff like this that gives Obama's "anti-science" rhetoric legs. Whether she intended to or not, Bachmann has aligned herself with some fairly nutty anti-vaccination crusaders. My pediatrician wife has to put up with this junk science almost every day.
Michelle Bachmann - the Al Gore "AGW Profit" of vaccinations.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI wouldn't put her in Al Gore's class until she's spent a few years crusading against vaccinations. At this point, she's just wrong on this issue; she hasn't dug herself in as deep as Gore yet.
I'm not confident she won't double down on it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTrue. We should wait until she starts sweating like a pig, and howling at the audiences, banging her fist on the lecterns.
Problem is, the analogy holds a few drops of water, don't it?
It took her very little time to glum on to her newfound opposition to HPV vaccines. She saw the apparent opening, and ran into it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI dunno, I think the anti-vaccine paranoia crosses party lines. I'm sure there's plenty of liberals (especially liberal women) who upon hearing Bachmann go guns blazing on the issue said to themselves, "Bachmann may be a crazy, fascist, sub-human Republican, but I'm glad she's speaking out on this issue."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI hope someone from the Rick Perry campaign has read Henry Miller's post and prep their candidate for the next debate if the subject comes up again. If it does, Perry should Bachmann the biggest smackdown yet seen in this campaign by pointing out that she is a fraud and a liar for claiming that a woman's kid became retarded because of the vaccine, using the information from the CDC study (100% effective, no major side effects).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHave any of these columnists been living in the same country as the Tea Party and the American people? It is Merck, Medicaid, and Perry who have confused and frightened parents needlessly and severely damaged the credibility of our world-class vaccination regime. The HPV "vaccine" is at best completely unproven to prevent cancer when these girls reach the age of actually getting it--it is too new to study its long term effectiveness. It costs hundreds of dollars per person, unlike typical polio and MMR vaccines. Levin's Medicaid point plays right into Bachmann's hands against both Obama and Perry--federal government incentives distorting state policies and destroying parental rights. Don't you see, we are talking about the candidate's philosophies and approaches, and even good conservatives are getting snowed?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYour compass must be stuck on stupid dude. Your second sentence is a non-sequitur wrapped in a ramble. Are you one of those confused and frightened parents? The vaccine (love those scare quotes dude...adds real depth)is to prevent HPV, not cancer. HPV causes cancer. Eliminate the cause, you eliminate the effect. Simple concept. Simple concepts for simple minds. Sounds like a Bachmann campaign ad!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDid you even read Henry Miller's post?
The Gardasil vaccine was found to be 100% percent effective.
One. Hundred. Percent.
Far from "unproven".
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBachmann is a fool. I said it. I mean it. She doesn't belong up there, and given this nonsense on this vaccine, I'm pretty sure she's disqualified herself to even sit in congress. She's embarrassing.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBachman has clearly jumped the shark. She's desperately clinging to an illusory hope that she could still win.
With this round of lunacy I wouldn't even vote for her as dog catcher and I'd be VERY hesitant to vote for anyone who'd have her on the team.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseObama called people like me "bitter clingers." People like me who weren't paying attention voted for Obama. Nixon called us "the silent majority."
People like me are a mystery to Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, and other great progressive thinkas.
Ronald Reagan did understand people like me. Rick Perry speaks to people like me.
People like me elect the president. Get with it or watch it all fall down. (n Sarah, put up r shutty. Thx )
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse