Similar
Stories
Friday, February 2, 2007
Perry signs order requiring anti-cancer vaccine for girls
Wile E. Governor slips in executive order to avoid opposition from parents and conservatives.
Using his executive privilege, Gov. Rick Perry signed an order on Friday requiring that female students be vaccinated against a sexually transmitted virus that can cause cervical cancer.
By making it an executive order, Perry sidesteps opposition from conservatives and parents' rights groups. The order makes Texas the first state to require the vaccine, called Gardasil and recently licensed by the Food and Drug Administration for use in girls and women 9 to 26 years old.
Merck, the manufacturer, is funding efforts to pass similar laws across the country, for use on girls as young as 11 or 12.
According to Channel 11, Merck doubled its lobbying budget in Texas and has funneled money through an organization called Women in Government, to which Perry has a number of personal ties. Merck also contributed $6,000 to his re-election campaign.
Girls can refuse the vaccine if their parents file an objection on religious or other philosophical grounds.
Posted by T.G.
Faved or commented on by...
Latest Contests
Latest comments...
Food truck review: Cupcakes from Trailercakes
I don't think I can trust the opinion of anyone who thinks French fries are a waste of space. That b
Tarrant County Democrats Paula Pierson, Chris Turner compete to return to Texas House
I recently saw the following post online:
The District 101 primary in Tarrant County is an interes
Shawn Parikh, former Peg News staffer, on the red carpet
Jason Rice, Cougar Town -- the series in which Shawn has been appearing intermittently -- has been p
twisteddog, anonymous:
Too bad there's no vaccine for idiocy.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Mike Orren, verified:
This one certainly snuck up on me -- And I thought the commercials were creeping me out.
<object height="350" width="425"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hJ8x3KR75fA"><param name="wmode" value="transparent"><embed height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hJ8x3KR75fA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" wmode="transparent"></object>
Good overview of the arguments on both sides here: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/f...
Here's a con-piece: http://www.whosplayin.com/xoops/html/...
Don't know why it's the governor's job to play nanny on this one?
Maybe this is why: http://www.latimes.com/news/printedit...
*But the move drew criticism from conservative groups, which noted that the governor had accepted campaign contributions from the vaccine's manufacturer, Merck & Co.*
*"All Merck wanted was a mandate so the insurance companies would have to pay for this. Follow the money," said Cathie Adams, president of the Texas Eagle Forum, an organization that promotes socially conservative government policies.*
More on Perry as a sweetheart of the pharmaceutical industry: http://www.publicintegrity.org/rx/rep...
Oh, and Merck's head lobbyist in Texas? Perry's former chief of staff: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-n...
At 3 doses per girl, ranging from $120-$200 per dose, and 365,000 girls per year, Merck just racked up a $131 million annuity minimum.
But there's a lot more than that at stake for Merck. Insurance companies currently don't cover Gardasil. A state, particularly a big state like Texas, mandating the vaccines means that insurance companies are likely to add it to their roster of covered treatments -- increasing adoption in the 49 civilized states where it is not mandatory.
Enforcement on this (not at Merck's expense, I'm sure) will be a nightmare.
No doubt HPV and cervical cancer are serious problems. But there are a lot of unanswered questions still about the effectiveness of Gardasil. And the money trail here doesn't leave me feeling at all certain that Perry has the well being of Texas women first and foremost in his mind.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Mike Orren, verified:
As expected, lots of people are crying foul, led by Lewisville Republican Jane Nelson:
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/conten...
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
jenn, anonymous:
Why do conservatives cheapen their legitimate gripes with this legislation (specifically cost and the questionable relationship between Perry and Merck) by bringing up the "moral/religious" debate? I don't want to listen to anything they have to say when they even obliquely intimate that somehow this vaccine is going to turn a bunch of 12-year-olds into sex fiends.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
Mike Orren, verified:
<embed align="middle" allownetworking="external" allowscriptaccess="always" bgcolor="#006699" flashvars="config=http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/xml/data_synd.jhtml?vid=82235%26myspace=false" height="325" name="comedy_player" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" quality="high" src="http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/syndicated_player/index.jhtml" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="340">
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
What do you think?