ExAFO 0 #51 March 1, 2007 If you're stupid enough to refuse a vaccine for a preventable disease provided to you by the govt, then go fuck yourself when you seek treatment for said disease using govt funds.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindercles 0 #52 March 1, 2007 For the record, the mandate does not call for the government to pay for the shots. They are to be paid for by the individual families. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #53 March 1, 2007 QuoteIf you're stupid enough to refuse a vaccine for a preventable disease provided to you by the govt, then go fuck yourself when you seek treatment for said disease using govt funds. Thank goodness we have objective, even-keeled people like yourself to help us along our path. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shell666 0 #54 March 1, 2007 QuoteQuoteAnd your comment about the deaths being avoided by women getting pap smears is ridiculous. Bordering on extremely stupid, actually. The deaths from cervical cancer are primarily due to lack of pap smears and medical care. Even the American Cancer Society considers it a preventable cancer. Yes, it is preventable but you can still get cervical cancer even if you get regular pap smears.'Shell Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shell666 0 #55 March 1, 2007 QuoteQuoteAnd your comment about the deaths being avoided by women getting pap smears is ridiculous. Bordering on extremely stupid, actually. How many women, who get annual pap smears, die from cervical cancer? Or is this an "extremely stupid" question. Let's cite your recent post as the answer to that. Considering one in 37,500 women dies from cervical cancer each year'Shell Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #56 March 1, 2007 QuoteQuoteHow many women, who get annual pap smears, die from cervical cancer? Or is this an "extremely stupid" question. Let's cite your recent post as the answer to that. Considering one in 37,500 women dies from cervical cancer each year I'll try again: How many women, who get annual pap smears, die from cervical cancer? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shell666 0 #57 March 1, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteHow many women, who get annual pap smears, die from cervical cancer? Or is this an "extremely stupid" question. Let's cite your recent post as the answer to that. Considering one in 37,500 women dies from cervical cancer each year I'll try again: How many women, who get annual pap smears, die from cervical cancer? Thanks. I can read. Where in your recent post, that I cited above, do you have proof that the 1 woman per 37,500 who died of cervical cancer DIDN'T have regular pap smears? My point is this. Yes, pap smears can detect and help prevent cervical cancer BUT they don't erradicate it. You can still get cervical cancer even if you have regular pap smears. And you could still die from it.'Shell Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #58 March 1, 2007 QuoteQuoteAs long as a government has an obligation to provide medical care for its citizens through things like Medicaid and state indigent care programs it should have some say in preventative measures which will reduce total expenditures. The goverment provides food stamps (which can't be used for tobacco or alcohol) for a portion of the population, too. Does that allow it to prevent everyone from purchasing tobacco or alcohol? Prohibition is an orthagonal issue, although protecting their citizens' from potentially harmful substances is one of the governments' many jobs which US courts consider to be constitutional. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #59 March 1, 2007 Recently my wife had surgery for cervical cell dysplasia. It was detected by a pap smear. I hope she'll be OK. It's in the family; her sister has had the procedure twice so far. My mother in law was recently diagnosed with uterine cancer. We have 2 teenage daughters. At the recommendation of their gynecologist and their G.P., both of whom are women, we're getting the girls the HPV vaccine. To us, it's a no-brainer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nathaniel 0 #60 March 1, 2007 Quote Considering one in 37,500 women dies from cervical cancer each year, should we spend $360.00 on every woman to avoid these deaths Neglecting survivors, that makes it about $13.5 million per life saved, if the vaccine were 100% effective (which it's not). That's on the high end on the estimated value of a life, afaik. If the price could be brought down to UK levels, $120 or so, then it'd be $4.5M per life saved, which is an entirely reasonable amount to spend. You still have to factor in the effectiveness of the vaccine tho. I don't know what it is, but I do recall reading that the current vaccine is not equally effective against all strains, which could result diminishing effectiveness as the affected strains are winnowed out and the unaffected strains continue to thrive. All in all the vaccine is probably just on the far side of too expensive. Wait till the patent runs out, then it'll be worth it if / when prices drop.My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #61 March 1, 2007 you also must consider the costs of those that contract cancer but are then 'saved' by medical intervention. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nathaniel 0 #62 March 1, 2007 Indeed, have you got any information on that? I have no idea what it costs to get treated for cervical cancer, or what quality of life a survivor has afterward. I just found this site which puts the cost of treating hpv in the US at $1.5B / year, so that would be $10 / woman / year. You'd have to get into the distribution of age of onset, and also tabulate the effectiveness of the vaccine...but at first blush this could tip the scales back in favor of the vaccine.My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #63 March 1, 2007 QuoteIndeed, have you got any information on that? I have no idea what it costs to get treated for cervical cancer, or what quality of life a survivor has afterward. no idea. To estimate, I'd take the number of women that contract it per year and compare to the number of fatalities. If contracting-but-surviving makes up the vast majority, I'd expect the potential cost savings to be large. Any surgical proceedure runs 5 figures; a simple CAT scan runs 5k. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #64 March 1, 2007 Wow...you must have an incredible amount of trust in our government. For the record, I think it was inappropriate for the governor to force people to pay and get the vaccine. Should parents make sure that their daughters get the HPV vaccine? Yes! Should our government force people to do so? No! Also I think its ridiculous that people think that by vaccinating young girls it would encourage them to have sex. Would they say the same if it was an AIDS vaccine? I'm realistic enough about the stupidity of the herd to say that I bet they will.www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #65 March 1, 2007 Wow I had a cat scan 4 years ago and it cost me $1500.00. Inflation sucks. www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #66 March 1, 2007 QuoteIf you're stupid enough to refuse a vaccine for a preventable disease provided to you by the govt, then go fuck yourself when you seek treatment for said disease using govt funds. I don't think he's susceptible to cervical cancer (I could be wrong). Probably why he's so cavalier about it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #67 March 1, 2007 QuoteQuote Considering one in 37,500 women dies from cervical cancer each year, should we spend $360.00 on every woman to avoid these deaths Neglecting survivors, that makes it about $13.5 million per life saved, if the vaccine were 100% effective (which it's not). That's on the high end on the estimated value of a life, afaik. . Ummm - no. You are comparing ANNUAL deaths with a LIFETIME of protection for that $360. It actually works out to around $170,000 per life saved. Pretty cheap, really.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #68 March 1, 2007 QuoteWow I had a cat scan 4 years ago and it cost me $1500.00. Inflation sucks. Stanford prices suck. Also, my particular cat scan required an injection of dye. Do all? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nathaniel 0 #69 March 1, 2007 oh oops, missed the per year bit on the 37500 number. It's a shoo in then hold on a sec tho, reading further into that paper I linked, the vaccines they tested had slightly reduced effect after 4 years and after 36 months. I don't think it's safe to conclude a lifetime of immunity (the vaccine isn't 100% effective to start off with, it only works against certain strains), but your point is taken nonetheless. It wouldn't take more than a few years of effect to cross the threshold of economic viability.My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #70 March 2, 2007 I don't think mine did. Of course I was in a lot of pain. They probably could have told that sucking the doc's dick would make it all better and I would have believed it.....I wouldn't have done it mind you but I woulda believed it! www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #71 March 2, 2007 QuoteI don't think mine did. Of course I was in a lot of pain. They probably could have told that sucking the doc's dick would make it all better and I would have believed it.....I wouldn't have done it mind you but I woulda believed it! yeah, there's nothing so brilliant as an opening barely wider than your shoulders when you have a broken shoulder. Or 'hold your breathe for 20 seconds' when you have broken ribs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #72 March 2, 2007 QuoteQuoteAs long as a government has an obligation to provide medical care for its citizens through things like Medicaid and state indigent care programs it should have some say in preventative measures which will reduce total expenditures. this is tacit approval that socialism is more important than individuality - doesn't seem a reasonable basis to draw a conclusion Are mandated vaccinations any more objectionable than helmet and seatbelt laws? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #73 March 2, 2007 Quote Are mandated vaccinations any more objectionable than helmet and seatbelt laws? Helmets and seatbelts don't have appreciable side effects and can easily be undone should the need arise. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #74 March 2, 2007 QuoteUmmm - no. You are comparing ANNUAL deaths with a LIFETIME of protection for that $360. It actually works out to around $170,000 per life saved. Pretty cheap, really. Lifetime of protection? Another one of Kallend's famous fabrications? I call bullshit. How did you reach that $170,000/life figure? Fuzzy math? The vaccine is reported to be effective for at least 4.5 years. Anything beyond that is speculation. The vaccine works against the strains that are thought to cause 70% of the cases of cervical cancer. It is not known to work on the other 30 percent. Cost = $170,000/life saved? Riiiight Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #75 March 2, 2007 QuoteWhere in your recent post, that I cited above, do you have proof that the 1 woman per 37,500 who died of cervical cancer DIDN'T have regular pap smears? My point is this. Yes, pap smears can detect and help prevent cervical cancer BUT they don't erradicate it. You can still get cervical cancer even if you have regular pap smears. And you could still die from it. What is the incidence of cervical cancer among women who get regular pap smears (and hpv testing - when recommended)? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
