Good start to cancer jab campaign (From Swindon Advertiser)

Were parents advised of these severe side effects.

Seek medical attention right away if any of these SEVERE side effects occur when using Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine:

Severe allergic reactions (rash; hives; itching; difficulty breathing; tightness in the chest; swelling of the mouth, face, lips, or tongue); burning, numbness, or tingling; fainting; unusual tiredness or weakness; wheezing.

These have all been collated by the US Federal Drug Agency. One things for certain I would not allow my granddaughter to have the injections. It is often said the side effects we are not told about are usually far worse, like the 'suicidal tendency created by certain smoking cessation drugs.

The side effects are listed on the nhs website:
http://www.immunisat
ion.nhs.uk/Vaccines/
HPV/About_the_HPV_va
ccine/Are_there_any_
side_effects_of_the_
vaccine

It also says there 'These are extremely rare and the nurse or doctor is trained to deal with vaccine anaphylactic reactions. Individuals recover completely with treatment, usually within a few hours.'

This is also posted on the general immunisation site.

Is the vaccine safe?

The vaccine has undergone rigorous safety testing as part of the licensing process required in the UK and other European countries.

Doesn't exactly answer the question does it.

Bobfm - having seen quite a lot of American TV and therefore a lot of adverts for drug treatments available over the counter - some of those come with quite horrific side effects - internal bleeding for heart tablets etc. But people still buy and take them!

Our standard of healthcare is still above and beyond that of the USA and we should be grateful for that. I would trust what the NHS site says over the Federal one any day.

The fact that it has undergone safety testing for licensing within the UK sounds good enough, surely?

My wife has recently had an abnormal smear test and has been told it is a likely side effect of HPV. This is widespread, undetectable and largely untreatable.

She now faces an agonising wait for six months for a second test, and the possibility of being diagnosed with a problem and the need for treatment.

Bob, I hope your child ignores your opinions and has your grand-daughter vaccinated as soon as is appropriate. It may one day prevent her going through what my wife is experiencing right now.

ourtone, I sincerely hope she gets the all clear, however the HPV immunisation, has only been shown to have been effective against type 16 and 18 HPV, and there are 15 variants, and although they are the most common, we are once again talking about the possibility of saving 400 lives a year against a cost expected to be £500million over a two year period.

The success or otherwise of this campaign will not be known for two decades, and what worries some specialists is that women may well believe they have had the Panacea and not go for routine scans, thus increasing the number of deaths which currently stand at about 900/year in the UK.

The most worrying aspect is that pre 18 sex is the greatest risk and yet as has been seen on these pages, posters and health officials believe it is right to pander to a young persons carnal desire rather than re-enforce the inherent danger that exists from early sex.

I have no wish to offend but I believe that the millions being spent on this 'plan' would be better spent discouraging under age and high risk sex, as we are not just talking about one, quite rare problem. We are talking about a host of other sexually transmitted diseases that can be equally as deadly.

Just a thought but has anyone ever stopped to consider that the cervical smear tests themselves may be responsible for this type of cancer? After all, they do scrape off cells (often leaving the women bleeding for a few days).

Basically, it causes a scratch in an area that is not supposed to get scratched. Could that possibly be what starts the cells in some cases to grow out of control thus causing cancer?

As for the HPV vaccine, look at the high numbers of girls who have either died or been left permanently disabled in America. The powers-that-be insist that this vaccine is safe? Do they know what the long-term side effects are going to be? No.

I would not have liked my daughter to have had this as a girl.

If they are so worried about girls falling victim to HPV, then wouldn't it make more sense to stop the promiscuity that abounds and which is forced on very young girls? For a start get rid of all these magazines aimed at 10 years olds upwards which encourages young girls to experiment with sex long before they are physically, mentally and emotionally mature.

In other words, bring back moral values.

Before anyone considers allowing their daughters to be vaccinated with the HPV vaccine, I would urge you to read up about it, both the pros and the cons and make a sensible, informed decision one way or the other.

"The most worrying aspect is that pre 18 sex is the greatest risk"

"If they are so worried about girls falling victim to HPV, then wouldn't it make more sense to stop the promiscuity that abounds and which is forced on very young girls"

You are both obsessing on the fact that this is being given initially to girls before they are sexually active, ignoring that it would be expensive and pointless to give this to women after they become sexually active. Giving this vaccine only to women "that have become emotionally mature enough" won't change their sexual behaviour, and by the logic you two have been using would send the message "you can engage in sexually risk behaviour when you're older and we'll give you this protection, but before then tough luck"

There hasn't been the slightest suggestion from either the company that developed this life saving vaccine or the NHS that it is license for people to engage in under age or risky sexual behaviour.

"Before anyone considers allowing their daughters to be vaccinated with the HPV vaccine, I would urge you to read up about it, both the pros and the cons and make a sensible, informed decision one way or the other."

While you're at it read up on HPV itself, more people have it than you think, including people who wouldn't consider themselves promiscuous. The lesson of this story is as always, tell your kids not to do it and if you do it - use a bloody condom, whether you've been in a relationship for years or not.

A recent study in America of teenagers who pledged not to have sex before marriage showed that not only were they no less likely to have premarital sex, but were more likely not to use any form of protection or birth control. Which should surprise precisely nobody.

The real issue is why is the NHS spending so much money on a treatment that their own statistics suggest will save, with all due respect to those who have lost and are going to lose loved ones to this, so few. Surely they can think of more productive uses for the money? It's inhuman but the NHS has a finite budget, it would be nice to think they can pay for all these treatments that will save lives, but the reality is that modern medicine is continuing to deliver more and increasingly expensive treatments for all kinds of ills and the NHS can't fund them all for everybody.