Michigan Votes Forum

Discuss issues, ideas and legislation related to the Great Lake State.
Welcome to Michigan Votes Forum Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
Latest post 01-03-2013 10:16 PM by delia. 115 replies.
Page 3 of 3 (116 items) < Previous 1 2 3
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 10-26-2006 4:55 PM In reply to

    This bill is a smart move

    I accept good leadership. If you disagree then just sign the form and don't get the shot. I care about children. I support this bill.
  • 10-26-2006 4:56 PM In reply to

    I think you are just paranoid if you think this is control

    You still have choice. And yes health care and government should go together as long as their is a degree of choice. Although, I WOULD like to live in a smoke free society.
  • 10-26-2006 5:37 PM In reply to

    get it right

    This bill hasn't passed both houses yet. It's a long way from becoming law.
  • 11-08-2006 9:51 PM In reply to

    Never heard of them?

    The four strains of HPV this vaccine protects against - HPV 6, HPV 11, HPV 16, and HPV 18 cause genital warts (6,11) and cervical cancer. I assume you've heard of genital warts and cancer
  • 11-08-2006 9:54 PM In reply to

    What?

    What do you mean its not been tested? It has indeed been tested and retested. Meanwhile kids continue to get the HPV infections causing cancer and genital warts. You need to read up before you offer your opinions...
  • 11-08-2006 9:58 PM In reply to

    Bad batch?

    This vaccine is made from parts of the HPV capsid (outside) of the actual virus itself. It is different than the live or killed vaccines. Think of the capsid as the vehicle the virus moves around in. The vaccination causes the immune system to make antibodies specific to the virus without ever introducing the virus into the body.
  • 11-08-2006 10:05 PM In reply to

    At risk

    The bill assumes that the 11 year old will EVENTUALLY have sex regardless of what you seem to think. It doesn't make a difference if its by poor choice (or rape) at 12 or during marriage at 25. It assumes that it is better to immunize early when you are sure to protect the girl long before she has sex and is exposed to the virus. It will then be too late. Even if she waits for marriage, there is no guarantee that her new husband isn't a carrier of the virus (males can get the virus, they just can't get the cervical cancer - cuz they have no cervix).... so in your overreaction you may have made a life threatening choice for your daughter's entire life.
  • 11-08-2006 10:07 PM In reply to

    And by the way

    By the way, comparing chicken pox and HPV is alot like comparing colds and ebola..... I'm glad you're SO well informed. I pray for your kid(s)
  • 11-08-2006 10:09 PM In reply to

    Suggest

    I suggest you do more than suggest.... say what you mean. Two of the four strains of HPV protected against cause genital warts. Males can carry all four strains, but the current push is on females because they can get the cervical cancer. There is only so much funding to go around, so the little girls are getting the immunization first. Australia already offers the vaccine to boys as well as girls.
  • 11-08-2006 10:18 PM In reply to

    Ignorance can kill

    I seriously suggest everyone get some facts on HPV and the vaccine. The reason it is proposed for girls at such a young age is because the vaccine is only effective before exposure to the virus. The virus can also infect males. It is currently targeted at girls because of the cervical cancer connection. There is no good reason to even THINK of not getting this vaccine for your little girl. It doesn't matter how she could get the diseases it prevents. No matter how you bring up your child, there is a chance of them having sex, or worse still a victim of rape. Would you rather get them the vaccine or tell them "I told you so" when they have a case of cervical cancer? Also, by making the vaccine mandatory it opens up its administration to those who cannot afford optional treatments.... those uninsured, those on medicaid, etc.... regardless of what some people think, the world does not revolve solely around YOU
  • 11-08-2006 10:55 PM In reply to

    let's all think logically

    everyone on here is so concerned with their daughter and what kind of message she will be getting from receiving the vaccine. It is important to think about the external factors that parents can not control. If they care so much about their daughters than they would do anything to protect them and letting them have this vaccination is one step towards that. What about the boy that your daughter dates down the road. you do not know the sexual partners he has been with or what he has come in contact with. this is how you protect your daughter; from the external forces that are out of your control. if you raise your daughter to be an independent women who can take care of herself you will want to give her all the knowledge available about sex and health and waiting. You can't keep her locked in a room forever. Knowledge is power. This vaccine could have saved me from the heartbreak and confusion I'm facing now. All the unanswered questions I have because I was not given the knowledge when I was younger.
  • 11-09-2006 1:55 AM In reply to

    A CHOICE

    IT SHOULD BE A CHOICE. NOT MANDATORY IMMUNIZATION.
  • 11-13-2006 5:55 PM In reply to

    This may not be such a great idea!

    Those who think this is such a hot idea should do some research on "DES Daughters". DES stands for diethylstilboestrol, a synthetic estrogen peddled by physicians from 1938 - 1971 as prenatal vitamins. That, too, was deemed safe then by the FDA. However, it was later found to increase the risk of contracting clear cell adenocarcinoma (CCA) of the cervix and vagina, reproductive tract deformities, breast cancer, and even testicular cancer, among other "things", in the children born to mothers who took the drug during those years. The women who took it are also at an increased risk for breast cancer and CCA. In fact, in 1953, when DES was found not to prevent miscarriages or premature births, it was still kept on the market until at least 1971. The HPV vaccine hasn't even been tested by the FDA long enough to say with any certainty that it's effective, yet our legislators are chomping at the bit to have our daughters and granddaughters innoculated. Thanks, but no thanks. I've already got a daughter with the clear cell adenocarcinoma because she's a DES Daughter and this family is going to pass on this potential govenment "mandate". Here's a link where you can start learning about DES. Click on everything on the page related to it: http://womenshealth.about.com/cs/azhealthtopics/a/desdaughters.htm C. J. Williams
  • 11-29-2006 2:39 AM In reply to

    michigan already allows for excemptions to mandated vaccines for medical, and religious reasons. I believe we also allow them to opt out for philosophical reasons too, but I'm not sure on that. You just have to be willing to prove it. it didn't need to be in the language because it already exists.
  • 11-29-2006 2:42 AM In reply to

    the hpv vaccines were also approved by the Advisory Committee for Immuniztion Practices. It was stamped by more than the FDA. To be mandated, the vaccine needs more than just the FDA's stamp of approval.
  • 12-08-2006 3:08 PM In reply to

    Vaccine

    Apparently, you missed the point of the post you replied to. The poster was not comparing the severity of the two diseases (although chicken pox can be quite severe and in some people potentially deadly). The point was that the information about the vaccine should be coming from the doctor's office and not the school office. Distribution of medical information is most properly done from the doctor's office. Are there any other vaccines/medications about which information is distributed from the schools? The answer is no.
  • 12-08-2006 4:06 PM In reply to

    the answer is

    YES. ritalin prescriptions are routinely written with only the recommendation of a teacher.
  • 12-11-2006 7:46 AM In reply to

    Ritalin

    You are incorrect there. Teachers fill out something called the Conner's scale which details the behavior that they are seeing in the classroom. Parents fill out one for what they are seeing at home. By the way, these are only filled out if the parent is open to it. Then parents take the child to the doctor. No doctor worth his/her license would write a prescription for Ritalin if the behavior is only being seen in one location. Also, information regarding Ritalin or any other psychotropic drug is not being provided through the school office.
  • 12-11-2006 8:03 AM In reply to

    my neighbors had

    their daughter "prescribed" with ritalin despite their objections. they are currently going to court to get the situation handled. they were NOT notified. they were NOT consulted. by the way, this "attention deficit" affected child can play video games for hours at a time. this "attention deficit" affected child can play music, in this case her guitar, for hours at a time.
  • 12-11-2006 9:29 AM In reply to

    Ritalin

    I suspect that there is more to this story than you are telling. Ritalin must be prescribed by a doctor. Last I heard, no school has a doctor on staff.
  • 12-11-2006 9:38 AM In reply to

    it's not a staff doctor

    they are concerned about. it's a doctor that gave a 13 year old girl a prescription for ritalin, and filled it, without her parent's consent or knowledge. it's also the teacher who 'suggested' that this child be "prescribed" with ritalin, also without her parent's knowledge or consent. imagine what the parents must have felt when their daughter came home with a brand new shiny bottle of ritalin and showed her family at the dinner table. by the way, did you know that the major "drug of choice" for those who can't afford pot or crack is some other kid's ritalin ground up and smoked? i, for one, don't want the school system in any way concerned with medicating my child. that is between me, my doctor of choice, and my child. if the school has a problem with it, they should bring it up to the parent, and let them handle it, or not, as they see fit.
  • 12-11-2006 9:41 AM In reply to

    by the way...

    the school denies any involvement, but the doctor has records of a "visit" in the presence of "an adult" during school hours, on a day when the child was NOT absent. being taken to a doctor during school hours by school employees without parental permission is definately a serious matter. of course, the doctor is being slow in coming forward with information. an arrest warrant should change that.
  • 12-11-2006 10:18 AM In reply to

    Ritalin

    Certainly, if all that you are stating is true, then, after a thorough investigation, heads should roll. First of all, this is certainly aberrant behavior. No teacher or staff member that I have ever been associate with has ever mentioned a particular medication or indeed ever suggests medication at all. It is always put back in the hands of the parents. I do have a couple of questions though. 1. Who does the child say took her to the doctor? Certainly, at age 13, she could identify the person if it was indeed a staff member. Being at middle school age she may not know all staff by face but she could certainly identify someone by a photograph or describe the person well enough to figure out who it was if indeed it was a staff member. Simply saying "an adult" is not enough to go on. 2. Who signed for the medication at the pharmacy? 3. Are you going after the doctor for prescribing and seeing the child without a parent? My own parents can't take my children to the doctor without written permission from me.
  • 12-11-2006 12:43 PM In reply to

    experience tells us

    a lot of kids and parents say a lot of things about what goes on in our schools, and a huge share of what they say just isn't truthful. This story has that cachet about it.
  • 12-11-2006 12:44 PM In reply to

    Well said...

    ...Something about this story just doesn't smell right.
  • 12-11-2006 1:47 PM In reply to

    Correct

    Women now have the right to be easy. They have the right to a vaccine that will maybe prevent one of many diseases that will harm them. The public also has the right to call them tramps
  • 12-11-2006 1:48 PM In reply to

    But if

    the kid is at risk for std's what will stop all the others??????????
  • 12-11-2006 2:29 PM In reply to

    what answers i have.

    1. the child says the teacher (one of hers) took her to the doctor, saying that she had a "problem" and that she was going to "help her with it". 2. unknown at this time, as the pharmacy is also being "a little slow" to produce records at this time. perhaps a warrant (upcoming) will help this matter. 3. they are "going after" the teacher for taking the child without parental permission, the doctor for seeing her without parental permission in a non-emergency setting, and the school system for condoning such behavior. of course, the other parties involved deny everything. the school involved has been "implicated" in this type of behavior before, and the doctor involved has been disciplined twice for similar acts.
  • 12-11-2006 2:30 PM In reply to

    how many kids in

    your child's class take ritalyn?
  • 12-11-2006 2:35 PM In reply to

    women have

    always had the right to be "easy". it's not something "granted" recently. most women take full advantage of that right, and the poor misguided souls they associate with must simply learn to put up with it. as for "social diseases"... i say it's a shame. there are those who say that they got what they deserved.
  • 12-11-2006 2:42 PM In reply to

    as most doctors

    cannot agree on what add/adhd IS, or what causes it, they CAN agree on what to do about it. 700 percent more kids are prescribed ritalin today than in 1990. the chances are good that your child will have 7 or 10 children currently in their classroom prescribed the drug. that's from kindergarden. not one doctor can say that there is any "sure test" for add/adhd, but they CAN be sure to prescribe stimulant drugs for it.
  • 12-19-2006 10:56 AM In reply to

    Medical information...

    ...is most appropriately distributed at the DOCTOR'S OFFICE, not the school's office. It is unreasonable to expect the school to cut back its already limited budget to give out information about something that the doctor should be doing.
  • 12-19-2006 10:58 AM In reply to

    should schools

    be teaching about health?
  • 04-10-2007 12:35 PM In reply to

    DO YOUR HOMEWORK!!!!

    HPV stories generate different reporting approach Fort Worth Daily News April 08, 2007 by Cindy Bevington (KPC News) Click here for the URL: I found the colorful pamphlets on my desk with a hand-printed note attached: “This hospital has no ties to drug companies — thought you would find this interesting and helpful.” It wasn’t signed. I was sorry for that because, of all the letters I’ve received in nearly a year of continuously writing about government waste in social services and government’s intrusion into parents’ rights over their children, this was the only unsigned comment that came my way. I was especially distressed that I wouldn’t be able to talk to this person in person, to tell him or her that, unfortunately, this hospital DOES have ties to drug companies. BIG ties. Yes, this vaccine information brochure from The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) does boldly proclaim “the Center does not receive support from pharmaceutical companies.” But what it doesn’t say is that some of the doctors working for this hospital not only receive support from pharmaceutical companies, but are the very inventors of the vaccines the brochures promote. For example, one doctor cited in the brochure, Paul Offit, is the chief of the division of infectious diseases at CHOP and director of the Vaccine Education Center there. However, he also shares the patent on Rota Teq, the rotavirus vaccine (for infant diarrhea) developed by drug giant Merck Inc. It is the same vaccine that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued a warning on in February, after reports of adverse side effects of a serious bowel condition began trickling into the government’s Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System (VAERS). Also, according to a statement by Indiana U.S. Rep. Dan Burton, R-5th, at a meeting of the U.S. House Committee on Government Reform on June 15, 2000, Offit reportedly had revealed to the committee that he received grant money from Merck to develop the vaccine. More ties to drug companies “(Offit) also disclosed that he is paid by the pharmaceutical industry to travel around the country and teach doctors that vaccines are safe,” Burton added in that June 15 meeting. At that time, Burton said, Offit was a member of the Centers for Disease Control’s advisory committee who had voted on three rotavirus issues, “including making the recommendation of adding rotavirus vaccine to the Vaccines for Children’s program.” (Interestingly, in an article Offit wrote in 2005, “Why Are Pharmaceutical Companies Gradually Abandoning Vaccines?” Offit noted that “today the largest single U.S. purchaser of vaccines is the federal government through the Vaccines For Children (VFC program.”) When you consider that, also in 2005, the Merck Company Foundation announced the creation of the Maurice R. Hilleman Chair in Vaccinology at CHOP through the University of Pennsylvania, you could hardly say that Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia has “no ties to drug companies.” Add to that: According to a press release issued when Merck endowed the chair, Hilleman was a senior vice president at Merck who retired in 1984. “CHOP and Dr. Hilleman have long been partners in the development of vaccines for children,” Steven M. Altschuler, M.D., president and CEO of The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said in the release. “We are honored to continue this tradition by supporting an endowed Chair in Dr. Hilleman’s name.” The amount of the endowment was $1.5 million, to be held jointly by the University of Pennsylvania and CHOP, the press release added, with CHOP contributing $500,000 in matching funds. Doctors’ letters flow in Ever since I started this series of government- related stories — beginning with a report on SEA 529, an Indiana law passed in 2005 that includes a section mandating mental health testing of all Indiana children from birth to age 22 — I have received letters, calls and e-mails from all over the U.S., as well as a few from Europe. These contacts are not just from parents or political action groups. What is phenomenal is the number of physicians who have taken time to write — and sign their names. Some have penned long letters detailing their disgust with government’s ever-intruding mandates on citizens’ lives, and especially children’s, and particularly when it comes to vaccines or prescription medicines. Others have attached their own research or others’ professional journal papers, to support their comments on how they believe pharmaceuticals are allegedly influencing physical and mental health mandates that ultimately benefit the pharmaceutical industry. An Eastern Seaboard physician wrote to tell me that, in the wake of states’ trying to mandate the human papilloma vaccine (HPV), suddenly last week, major insurance companies had decided not to pay for ANY childhood vaccines recommended by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) “if it is a vaccine that can be obtained through the state.” Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield, this Seabord physician said, had already sent letters to doctors in at least one state informing them of this new policy. With the budget constraints that most states face, and if they mandate these vaccines as a prerequisite to be able to come to school, the states are as good as mandating illiteracy, this doctor alleged, because many families who don’t qualify for state aid may not be able to pay for their own vaccines. (Probably not so coincidentally, The Associated Press in early February reported that insurance companies were beginning to balk at paying for Gardasil, Merck & Company’s HPV vaccine, which costs about $360 for three shots, not counting office visits or related charges.) A different doctor, from California, who is a former CDC employee-apparently-turned whistleblower — even sent me via e-mail a 300-page book he’s written on an ACIP vaccine that he alleges is causing serious side effects that he says the CDC is ignoring. An interview with this doctor will be part of future segments in this series. “Feel free to ‘steal’ any data you can use,” an Illinois doctor wrote, referring to documents he’d attached to his note on my HPV stories. An Oklahoma obstetrician/gynecologist — whose interview will be in the next segment of this series — promised to mail me copies of professional journals that refuted or questioned certain childhood vaccine information being circulated among the major media. These are just a few examples of the many letters that just keep coming from medical professionals who are in both private and group practice, as well as from pediatric doctors’ and physician support groups. Oprah guest had Merck connections Some people have contacted me believing I would take a “side” on one issue or another that they supported. In those instances I have explained that, whether I’m appearing on TV or radio or simply working, my objective is to report the facts as I find them. And, it goes without saying that between nearly a year’s worth of research on government mandates for children and the people who have contacted me on the topics I’ve been writing about, that I’ve gathered a literal mountain of documents containing all kinds of facts. Then, last week as I was trying to decide what facts I wanted to report next, and how to do it, someone called from Washington, D.C. — a member of the National Organization for Women — and asked me if I was aware that Oprah was addressing the HPV vaccine issue in a show the next day. No, I wasn’t, I responded, but I would be sure to catch it. And I did. It featured Marie Savard, a well- publicized physician and women’s health advocate who’s been making national speakers bureaus’ rounds for several years. I recognized her right away as a prominent speaker for Women In Government (WIG), a 501(c)(3) group comprised mostly of women state legislators. On its Web site, the group says its purpose is to provide “leadership opportunities, networking, expert forums and educational resources to address and resolve complex public policy issues.” On Oprah, Savard did not mention that she was one of WIG’s speakers. She also didn’t mention that she is a speaker for Merck. She also didn’t mention that she sits on the Board of Trustees for the University of Pennsylvania — where that Merck-endowed chair was established two years ago. Neither did she mention that she is a consulting physician/contributing expert for MerckSource.com, a public Web-based medical resource sponsored by Merck where, if you type in Marie Savard on the site’s search engine, you get hundreds of references to her. (Type in Marie Savard on Merck.com and you get three to 18, depending on which day you do it.) As a speaker, Savard appears compassionate and knowledgeable. But I was disappointed — no, angry — that she wasn’t up-front about her connections to the drug company that sells the drug she basically was selling on Oprah. But worse, I was bitterly disappointed in Oprah, who for many years has been my all-time heroine (if you don’t count the fictional Anne of Green Gables). A different approach Watching Oprah, and feeling my frustration grow at how major media seemingly have been selectively “informing” the public on the HPV vaccine issue, as well as other governmental moves into private lives — along with other information, such as Texas Governor Rick Perry’s most likely “other” reason for wanting to mandate the HPV vaccine in his state — I finally realized how I needed to finish reporting all I’ve learned in the last year. That is, if my employer would allow me to do it the way I was proposing. What I proposed was to write some first-person articles, in a fireside chat, conversational way. It’s not the conventional approach to reporting. But, then, I’ve never been a conventional reporter. Luckily, my supervisor — KPC Media Group publisher Terry Housholder — agreed. So, that’s why this and the next series of stories will appear in the format that you’re seeing now. Oh — what about Texas Gov. Perry? For the longest time, I’ve been sitting on this, waiting for some major news media to report it. But since they haven’t, I will: Remember Women In Government which, as a group, has taken on supporting mandates for the HPV vaccine in all the states, and which has sponsored numerous symposia and seminars at five-star hotels on HPV and cervical cancer? Well, on Nov. 17, 2005 at a “black-tie-optional gala dinner” that opened WIG’s three-day HPV & Cervical Cancer Summit in Atlanta, the keynote speaker was none other than Texas first lady Anita Perry who, according to her bio on the meeting’s agenda, “in 2004 continued her dedication to improving childhood immunization rates, serving as the state’s immunization education spokesperson.” The purpose of the conference, as evidenced by its printed agenda, was to overview the history of cervical cancer, and to review prevention strategies, including the “role of government and advocate leaders.” That particular session’s presenter was Dr. J. Thomas Cox, who among his many distinguished affiliations, includes Merck & Co. Other speakers at that conference included doctors and government officials who all have, or have had stakes in, or connections to drug companies, including Merck. Savard was there, too, as a facilitator for breakout sessions on HPV screening, prevention and education. Coming in future stories: Who pays for state- mandated health programs and drugs? How much does it cost to be a sponsor for Women In Government? What’s this about a government study following 100,000 children from the womb to age 21? CINDY BEVINGTON is the special assignments editor for this newspaper. She can be reached at cindyb@kpcnews.net **********************************
  • 03-31-2012 1:39 AM In reply to

    Re: DO YOUR HOMEWORK!!!!

    including the “role of government and advocate leaders.” That particular session’s presenter was Dr. J. Thomas Cox, who among his many distinguished affiliations, includes Merck & Co. new generation style
  • 01-03-2013 10:16 PM In reply to

    • delia
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on 01-04-2013

    Re: 2006 Senate Bill 1417 (Mandate HPV vaccine for sixth grade girls)

    It's time municipalities get their budgets under control unstead of finding creative ways to borrow funds. We are heading toward a cliff of financial ruin. Public pensions, pay and benefits need to be brought in line with the private sector. More borrowing just makes matter worse. thai dating
Page 3 of 3 (116 items) < Previous 1 2 3
Powered by Community Server (Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems