Should teenage schoolgirls be vaccinated at taxpayers' expense against cervical cancer?

http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account...

Can't believe you would even ask.

What if it was a vaccination for colon cancer or lukemia - would you grudge your 'taxpayers money' going towards that??

Believe me, the cost of the vaccination costs the NHS much less than a patient with cervical cancer.

What an appalling thought to suggest otherwise. Vaccination programs have always been the cornerstone of the NHS. The unbelievable suffering caused by cervical cancer in relatively young women would break the heart of even doctors used to death and pain, it certainly did mine!

Lets face it looking at it on merely financial terms it will ultimately save money, both for the NHS and the country itself. Less patients to treat with this disastrous cancer and maybe, when the second vaccine is finally produced to cover all HPV strains, massive savings on cervical screening.

As a taxpayer,I rather have my taxes go to good causes like this one and I agree with Rhianna,This is for the future which are these children,I have a 3 year old daughter and I feel blessed that by the time she is a teenager she will be protected against the most dangerous types of HPVs....it's a big step against cervical cancer and the fact that is accesible to most girls will save more lives.

I rather have the government pay for this than for some stupid senseles war and so many other stupid things that we have to pay like mothers who have babies like bunnies and get to sit in a couch waiting for their welfare check.

edit: And it's stupid to think that it will promote promiscuity,this vaccine is specifically for certain types of hpvs that cause cervical cancer and cervical cancer does not necessarily affect sexually active women,it's much more complicated than that.Besides there are still a whole lot of other STDs that are not protected by this shot.

YES!
We need to protect our future, younger people of society ARE the future

This silly Mary Whitehouse attitude of, "cervical cancer vaccinations will encourage sexual promiscuity" is frankly stupid! Having this vaccine is not going to prevent or encourage a girl to have sex. Having this vaccine will not be a deciding factor, either way in their decision to have sex.

Have your religion, but have common sense too.

EDIT
Thanks for your pointless email, we are all entitled to our opinions. You don't have to agree, and we as answerers certainly don't have to agree with you; frankly, this vaccine will prevent unnecessary suffering and loss of life. Opposing this vaccine makes no sense at all. This is a more cost effective way, treating cervical cancer is expensive. It will not encourage more young girls to have sex. Girls know the risks, but most teenagers think they are immortal, the risk of HPV was not preventing them from having sex in the past, neither will it do so in the future. You can contract HPV from having just ONE sexual partner, so a girl could wait till she is married before she has sex and STILL be at risk. The fact is, if you have sex, you are at risk from HPV, this vaccine offers 70% protection against the four types of HPV that have a direct link with cervical cancer.

All inoculations are funded by the state that is why we have the NHS, it is a good policy as it will prevent girls, woman later on will help prevent cervical cancer which is a marvellous thing.

On a pure commercial footing it will save the NHS millions of pounds later on not having to diagnose and treat cervical cancer

I can't believe you're even asking this!

Protecting the younger generation is a much better use of tax payers money than, for example, supporting those scrounging off the state. In the long run it would probably cost less to administer the vaccine than provide treatment for cervical cancer later in life.

I think this is the right way our money should be spent as it promotes a healthy future, rather than wasted on stupid things...like buying games consoles etc for convicts to enjoy in prison!!

yes! the girls are our future and need to be protected!
lots of people think that it will encourage young girls to have sex, but i dont think so. its all about being safe - just like any other vaccination.
self centred person you obviously are.

Good grief Andromed, of course they should - will your next question be 'Should people with cervical cancer be treated at the tax payers' expense?'

If we can protect the children of future we are doing good.

OF COURSE!!! illness will appear more and more and we better protect our little ones before then get those horrible things!!!
If they have more risk to get them, we surely should have them vaccinated!

Yes! I've had the injection its not that painful anyway! It hurts for about 2 days, then goes away. Having a sore arm is better than dying.

"At taxpayers' expense". Do you think your taxes will go down if they don't do this, or up if they do? Might as well get something out of them.

Yes definately!

Yes!