Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
About this Blog   |   On Twitter   |   Follow us on Facebook   |   RSS Feeds RSS Feed
Posted at 6:24 PM ET, 01/20/2011

Va. House will vote Friday on bill to eliminate HPV vaccine mandate for girls

By Fred Kunkle

Virginia's House of Delegates on Thursday gave preliminary approval to a bill that would no longer require girls to receive the HPV vaccine, after a lengthy and impassioned debate that chipped away at the usual partisan lines.

After arguing its risks and benefits, the Republican-led House, on a voice vote Thursday, advanced to final reading a bill lifting the mandate requiring school-age girls to be vaccinated against a virus that has been found to cause cervical cancer in adults. The bill is scheduled to receive a final House vote Friday.

The House will hold a final vote on the measure Friday morning.

Del. Kathy J. Byron (R-Lynchburg), who sponsored HB1419, said she was not arguing that the risks outweighed the benefits. But Byron, citing data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the New England Journal of Medicine, emphasized the reported risk of adverse reactions. She said parents alone should decide whether their daughters should receive the vaccine.

"You'll hear a lot of doctors that are convinced that this drug is the best thing for girls. And it may be appropriate for some children, and not other children. But I still believe that's a decision that shouldn't be made by the state, something that should be made by the parents," Byron said. She said Virginia is the only state to mandate the vaccine.

Other Republican supporters of lifting the mandate reminded lawmakers that the measure passed in 2007 with a good amount of lobbying from the vaccine's maker.

But Del. Christopher P. Stolle (R-Virginia Beach), who is an obstetrician and gynecologist, stood to speak long and forcefully against his fellow Republican's bill. Citing his own facts and figures -- and professional experience as a licensed physician -- Stolle said that removing the mandate would mean that as many as 1,300 more women a year would die. Stolle also explained that a vaccinated population offers benefits even to those who are not vaccinated because widespread immunization reduces the circulation of the virus in the rest of the community.

"I very, very strongly oppose this bill," Stolle said.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that HPV is the most common sexually transmitted disease and that at least half of all sexually active people will acquire the virus in their lifetime. The virus is the main cause of cervical cancer and can also cause other less common forms of cancer and genital warts. The FDA has approved two HPV vaccines -- both of which the CDC recommends as safe and effective.

Del. Jeion A. Ward (D-Hampton), who in 2007 sponsored a House bill mandating the HPV vaccine, also urged the House to reject the bill, invoking her own granddaughter.

"This bill is one of the most important bills to me that's ever come through this body," Ward said. "I know that this vaccine will save lives. I know that cervical cancer is the second-most common type of cancer in the world. If you have ever seen a woman die from cervical cancer, I'm sure think you will understand why this legislation is unbelievably disheartening to me."

Chances are the bill will not survive long if it leaves the House, according to Senate Majority Leader Richard L. Saslaw (D-Fairfax). Saslaw said the measure that finally passed the General Assembly was a bill with an opt-out provision sponsored by Sen. Janet D. Howell (D-Fairfax) in the Senate and former Del. Phillip A. Hamilton (R-Newport News) in the House.

-- Rosalind S. Helderman contributed to this report.

By Fred Kunkle  | January 20, 2011; 6:24 PM ET
Categories:  Fredrick Kunkle, General Assembly 2011, House of Delegates  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Loudoun board opposes toll road legislation
Next: N. Va. officials concerned over proposal that would consolidate the region's 3 major transit agencies

Comments

Even If you have an S TD, you are not alone.Find others with same STD at site named STDRomance//. you may be upset and think your sex life is over. However, once you settle down and learn the facts, you'll realize that having STD is not the end of the world, and it's not the end of your social life.

Posted by: herpesfinder | January 20, 2011 8:52 PM | Report abuse

Even If you have an S TD, you are not alone.Find others with same STD at site named STDRomance//. you may be upset and think your sex life is over. However, once you settle down and learn the facts, you'll realize that having STD is not the end of the world, and it's not the end of your social life.

Posted by: herpesfinder | January 20, 2011 8:53 PM | Report abuse

The STD counselor on annoymous herpes dating site http://www.Hsoulmate.com said that You just know that's it's not the end of the world. You will want to date againa nd you will want to have six again. You are worthy of love, and you deserve to be loved! Beleive in your own self worth!! Just remember to be carful and take the necessary precautions, and make sure you tell that man or woman first.

Posted by: chloe1chen2 | January 20, 2011 10:19 PM | Report abuse

The STD counselor on annoymous herpes dating site http://www.Hsoulmate.com said that You just know that's it's not the end of the world. You will want to date againa nd you will want to have six again. You are worthy of love, and you deserve to be loved! Beleive in your own self worth!! Just remember to be carful and take the necessary precautions, and make sure you tell that man or woman first.

Posted by: chloe1chen2 | January 20, 2011 10:20 PM | Report abuse

Living with STD is a hard life to many people. When I found this site pozmingle.com (my favorite STD dating site)I was once again hopeful. There are many sexy girls and hot guys who are seeking match living with the same STD here. All of them are friendly and informative.

Posted by: juliarix | January 21, 2011 12:18 AM | Report abuse

The bill sponsers won't say it, but they believe this vaccine will promote sexual activity. The same as they think about making condoms available. They'd rather some one contract a disease than help prevent contraction. The "it will promote activity" is a myth and scare tactic.

Posted by: jckdoors | January 21, 2011 9:07 AM | Report abuse

Maybe they should let parents who want to opt out, opt out. But only if the parents invest $100,000 into a trust fund in their childs name to pay for any cancer their children get, or spread to others by not getting the vaccine.

Posted by: MarilynManson | January 21, 2011 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Let us be honest. The reason for this vaccine is not for the "Good" of the consumer. The vaccine is to prevent a public burden.Example: many woman having cervical cancer= stress to our insurance costs. I happen to think if we are going to force a vaccine to prevent cervical cancer...they should require dependent girls to use birth control until a certain age...as to prevent a public burden of having to support her children.....Just a thought

Posted by: DCer10 | January 21, 2011 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company