ArchPundit

John Ruskin, he of Barack Obama really must of have gone to a madrassa regardless of evidence and the historical impossibility fame, attacks Democrats supporting Halvorson and Jakobbsen’s bills to mandate the HPV vaccine.

The arguments about like one might find in a Junior High term paper, but let’s look at his charges.

First he claims the mandate is anti-choice and here he could be correct if the bills didn’t include a simple opt out procedure of writing the school to say the parent or guardian chooses not to have their child vaccinated. As I’ve said, I think mandating insurance coverage of the vaccine would probably be adequate, but it’s hardly a high burden to opt out of the vaccine.

In terms of corporate welfare, does anyone think that Halvorson isn’t doing this because she believes it? Seriously–one can disagree with her on many grounds, but her interest in the subject is personal, not because she got a donation.

But here’s the gem:

Democrats are anti-science: Democrats refuse to accept the overwhelming scientific evidence that the HPV vaccination is not ready for market. Both the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) have publicly come out against this vaccine. AAFP said it was “premature” to consider HPV mandates because “long-term safety with widespread use” needs to be clarified. AAFP President Rick Kellerman, MD, said problems can crop up with a vaccine after it goes to market. He cited as an example Rotashield, which was FDA approved in 1998 to immunize against rotavirus but withdrawn from the market a year later after 76 cases of intussusception were reported. And Dr. Joseph A. Bocchini, MD, chair of the AAP’s Committee on Infectious Diseases, agreed that “it’s too early to consider mandates. There are other priorities that are more important right now.”

This is where it’s hard to tell if Ruskin is lying, stupid, or both:

American Academy of Family Physicians

“The AAFP feels it is premature to consider school entry mandates for human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV) vaccine until such time as the long term safety with widespread use, stability of supply, and economic issues have been clarified.”

Background:
The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), along with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and its Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), have recommendations for the use of human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV) which calls for routine vaccination with three doses of HPV for females 11-12 years of age. The vaccination series can be started in females as young as 9 years of age. Catch-up vaccination is recommended for females 13-26 years of age who have not been vaccinated previously or who have not completed the full vaccine series. These recommendations can be accessed on the Recommended Adolescent Immunization Schedule (PDF file: 1 page/89KB; More information on PDF files) and the Recommended Adult Immunization Schedule.

Recently, there has been increasing state level action considering mandating HPV vaccination with proof of vaccination required for school attendance. Several issues should be considered regarding a mandated school attendance requirement. These include that HPV does not adhere to the public health model for control of infectious disease in a school setting. (e.g. measles, chicken pox); a universal school attendance requirement would come as a sudden significant cost that may not be able to be paid for by patients, state public health departments, and the healthcare system; and assurance of an adequate HPV supply for such a sudden increased demand and ability to administer it.

CDC, AAFP, and AAP all recommend the vaccine for girls age 11 and 12.  They do feel it is ready for market. The distinction is that they don’t think it should be mandated yet which is prudent for several reasons as they mention.

The next nugget Ruskin tries to throw out there is that HPV is simply the result if irresponsible actions so we shouldn’t be rewarding irresponsible actions by protecting against them and by doing so one is hurting freedom.  That’s such a mess it’s hard to know where to start.  This is akin to saying we shouldn’t offer bypass surgery to those who eat poorly.

Finally:

Democrats are obsessed with sex: When it comes to the issue of government mandated HPV vaccine, all the Democrats can focus on is sex. Unable to argue their pro-mandate position on merit, they’ve been forced to throw up a smoke screen that attempts to focus debate solely on the erotic aspect of their proposed legislation. They introduce the issue via Sen. Halverson’s public discussion of private behavior; then take umbrage when the anti-mandate side engages in the debate. They accuse detractors of being obsessed with sex. But the Democrats single-minded focus – to the exclusion of all other debate (e.g. choice, rights, science, profits, etc.) – is an obsession with sex akin to that of a teenager.

What is the erotic part of the legislation?  Halvorson didn’t have a public discussion of private behavior, she had a public discussion of a private medical condition.  Attacking her for that and suggesting she’s a slut would seem to be where the obsession with sex lies.