SO SO SO
ANGRY by this type of arrogance.
From a representative of a State Senator in Wisconsin from the article I posted below:
"I think there are two things that are spiking concern right now, if I can be candid. One is that HPV is a sexually transmitted disease. If this were transmitted in any other way, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. ... The second problem is that if you pass the law today, the news story is today, even if the implementation is two years from now. ... And I think that's why we might do an education bill first. ... Because here's the most important thing - the public has to have faith."
Let me be clear, if a drug manufacturer is currently being sued for deaths related to a drug they produced, caused by risks they knew of in advance I do not have to accept anything the manufacturer, or the legislatures they pay for, say about a new, poorly tested drug -- ON FAITH.
Also, read this third article in the series.
These articles I've found to be the most unbiased and informative as they use little to no emotional arguments. Again, the article is long. But what's five minutes?
From a representative of a State Senator in Wisconsin from the article I posted below:
"I think there are two things that are spiking concern right now, if I can be candid. One is that HPV is a sexually transmitted disease. If this were transmitted in any other way, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. ... The second problem is that if you pass the law today, the news story is today, even if the implementation is two years from now. ... And I think that's why we might do an education bill first. ... Because here's the most important thing - the public has to have faith."
Let me be clear, if a drug manufacturer is currently being sued for deaths related to a drug they produced, caused by risks they knew of in advance I do not have to accept anything the manufacturer, or the legislatures they pay for, say about a new, poorly tested drug -- ON FAITH.
Also, read this third article in the series.
Since Gardasil is only effective against two high-risk strains of HPV, they warn
that there could be very serious and unintended consequences of mass
vaccination. For example, it is not known and has not been studied whether the
strains that are not covered by Gardasil would become more prevalent and
stronger without "competition" from the two strains against which the current
vaccine protects. This situation could lead to increased infection by strains
against which there is currently no vaccine.
These articles I've found to be the most unbiased and informative as they use little to no emotional arguments. Again, the article is long. But what's five minutes?
Comments