Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Health Safety Concerns Being Well Addressed in Clinical Drug Trials?
Replies
-
This content has been removed.
-
Or we could just promote more responsible behavior instead of vaccinating children against an STD.19
-
This content has been removed.
-
moosmum1972 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Or we could just promote more responsible behavior instead of vaccinating children against an STD.
It can be transmitted through saliva.....I know hiv tests are popular before sex but hpv before kissing?
Edit according to the nhs hpv infections can also be on the skin/hands/fingers as well as the mouth and genitals....you going to stop touching your kids incase you have it?
I suggest you review the studies.
None of those transmission modalities has been substantiated.5 -
This content has been removed.
-
According to the CDC, HPV is so common the nearly all men and women will contract it at some point in their life.6
-
stanmann571 wrote: »Or we could just promote more responsible behavior instead of vaccinating children against an STD.
Even when the ideal was sex with one person until you died it didn't often happen. I really don't think you've got a chance of getting anyone to follow that kind of behaviour now. And if you don't? HPV is so common, you're pretty much guaranteed to get it.3 -
counting_kilojoules wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Or we could just promote more responsible behavior instead of vaccinating children against an STD.
Even when the ideal was sex with one person until you died it didn't often happen. I really don't think you've got a chance of getting anyone to follow that kind of behaviour now. And if you don't? HPV is so common, you're pretty much guaranteed to get it.
We're talking about a degree of "responsibility" that the human race has never achieved. Since HPV is asymptomatic, even people with very few sexual partners can easily transmit it/pick it up even in the context of long-term, monogamous relationships.
So while I'm all for encouraging people to act responsible, I also think that taking steps to prevent preventable cancers is a part of responsibility. When I was a child, my mother put sunscreen on me to help protect me from future skin cancer. If vaccines protecting me from HPV were available then, I like to think she'd have done that too.13 -
I watched a commercial for a new diabetes drug and the list of contraindications was so long I wondered why anyone would bother. But then again, losing a limb or going blind to diabetes is pretty extreme too....4
-
counting_kilojoules wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Or we could just promote more responsible behavior instead of vaccinating children against an STD.
Even when the ideal was sex with one person until you died it didn't often happen. I really don't think you've got a chance of getting anyone to follow that kind of behaviour now. And if you don't? HPV is so common, you're pretty much guaranteed to get it.
The ideal hasn’t changed.10 -
I didn't realize that saving yourself for marriage and then waiting a few years after was the way kids were going these days?8
-
HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »I didn't realize that saving yourself for marriage and then waiting a few years after was the way kids were going these days?
I didn't realize that saying that anything of such sort was "ideal" was what anyone was doing these days. I'm not sure what one individual's personal moral convictions on a matter have to do with public health policy, tbh.9 -
I figured that's what he was saying. Wasn't it? To teach your kids some responsible behaviors? And that being with only one person in your whole life was the ideals still?
I took that is him saying that if people were responsible enough to not be with anyone else until they found someone to marry.. but since a lot of marriages end within a few years you would then have to give the marriage some wait time that this is how you would not have to be vaccinated for HPV2 -
HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »I figured that's what he was saying. Wasn't it? To teach your kids some responsible behaviors? And that being with only one person in your whole life was the ideals still?
I took that is him saying that if people were responsible enough to not be with anyone else until they found someone to marry.. but since a lot of marriages end within a few years you would then have to give the marriage some wait time that this is how you would not have to be vaccinated for HPV
That might be what he plans to teach his children. I don't see how that has anything to do with anything anyone else should or should not be doing.
I'm questioning the paradigm of shoulds regarding sexual behavior.
Furthermore, the issue of the vaccine isn't related to morality.7 -
It doesn't.. i just thought it was an odd thing to expect, that parents are just not teaching their kids any morals and thats why HPV needs a vaccine.0
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »I figured that's what he was saying. Wasn't it? To teach your kids some responsible behaviors? And that being with only one person in your whole life was the ideals still?
I took that is him saying that if people were responsible enough to not be with anyone else until they found someone to marry.. but since a lot of marriages end within a few years you would then have to give the marriage some wait time that this is how you would not have to be vaccinated for HPV
That might be what he plans to teach his children. I don't see how that has anything to do with anything anyone else should or should not be doing.
I'm questioning the paradigm of shoulds regarding sexual behavior.
Furthermore, the issue of the vaccine isn't related to morality.
Exactly.
2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »I figured that's what he was saying. Wasn't it? To teach your kids some responsible behaviors? And that being with only one person in your whole life was the ideals still?
I took that is him saying that if people were responsible enough to not be with anyone else until they found someone to marry.. but since a lot of marriages end within a few years you would then have to give the marriage some wait time that this is how you would not have to be vaccinated for HPV
That might be what he plans to teach his children. I don't see how that has anything to do with anything anyone else should or should not be doing.
I'm questioning the paradigm of shoulds regarding sexual behavior.
Furthermore, the issue of the vaccine isn't related to morality.
Of course it is.
HPV is an STD. Thus sexuality and morality are inescapably part of the conversation.
15 -
stanmann571 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »I figured that's what he was saying. Wasn't it? To teach your kids some responsible behaviors? And that being with only one person in your whole life was the ideals still?
I took that is him saying that if people were responsible enough to not be with anyone else until they found someone to marry.. but since a lot of marriages end within a few years you would then have to give the marriage some wait time that this is how you would not have to be vaccinated for HPV
That might be what he plans to teach his children. I don't see how that has anything to do with anything anyone else should or should not be doing.
I'm questioning the paradigm of shoulds regarding sexual behavior.
Furthermore, the issue of the vaccine isn't related to morality.
Of course it is.
HPV is an STD. Thus sexuality and morality are inescapably part of the conversation.
Far more important and immediate that sexuality and morality is practicality. And the fact is that morality doesn't cure or even slow the spread of STDs. Look to abstinence only AIDS prevention education in countries with high prevalence. They have a far, far higher instance of infection than areas which provide practical prevention advice and really, the only thing bstinence only AIDS prevention education has achieved is a higher instance of child-brides (the younger they are, the better chance they're a virgin).11 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »I figured that's what he was saying. Wasn't it? To teach your kids some responsible behaviors? And that being with only one person in your whole life was the ideals still?
I took that is him saying that if people were responsible enough to not be with anyone else until they found someone to marry.. but since a lot of marriages end within a few years you would then have to give the marriage some wait time that this is how you would not have to be vaccinated for HPV
That might be what he plans to teach his children. I don't see how that has anything to do with anything anyone else should or should not be doing.
I'm questioning the paradigm of shoulds regarding sexual behavior.
Furthermore, the issue of the vaccine isn't related to morality.
Of course it is.
HPV is an STD. Thus sexuality and morality are inescapably part of the conversation.
Far more important and immediate that sexuality and morality is practicality. And the fact is that morality doesn't cure or even slow the spread of STDs. Look to abstinence only AIDS prevention education in countries with high prevalence. They have a far, far higher instance of infection than areas which provide practical prevention advice and really, the only thing bstinence only AIDS prevention education has achieved is a higher instance of child-brides (the younger they are, the better chance they're a virgin).
It's only ineffective if it's not followed.10 -
I talked to my kids about safe sex, morality, STD's etc etc until i was blue in the face. Did they listen to a word? Probably Not!
3 -
stanmann571 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »I figured that's what he was saying. Wasn't it? To teach your kids some responsible behaviors? And that being with only one person in your whole life was the ideals still?
I took that is him saying that if people were responsible enough to not be with anyone else until they found someone to marry.. but since a lot of marriages end within a few years you would then have to give the marriage some wait time that this is how you would not have to be vaccinated for HPV
That might be what he plans to teach his children. I don't see how that has anything to do with anything anyone else should or should not be doing.
I'm questioning the paradigm of shoulds regarding sexual behavior.
Furthermore, the issue of the vaccine isn't related to morality.
Of course it is.
HPV is an STD. Thus sexuality and morality are inescapably part of the conversation.
WTAF? It's an often silent disease that can eventually become cancer and its spread can be stopped.
And, I'm sorry, but what nebulous objective moral authority does this stance come from? It's grounded, as far as I know, in a decidedly religious thinking that has no place in a discussion on public health and safety. The whole world doesn't ascribe to the values of any one religion or its precepts.
Furthermore, multiple sexual partners happen for more reasons than "loose" morals.
20 -
stanmann571 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »I figured that's what he was saying. Wasn't it? To teach your kids some responsible behaviors? And that being with only one person in your whole life was the ideals still?
I took that is him saying that if people were responsible enough to not be with anyone else until they found someone to marry.. but since a lot of marriages end within a few years you would then have to give the marriage some wait time that this is how you would not have to be vaccinated for HPV
That might be what he plans to teach his children. I don't see how that has anything to do with anything anyone else should or should not be doing.
I'm questioning the paradigm of shoulds regarding sexual behavior.
Furthermore, the issue of the vaccine isn't related to morality.
Of course it is.
HPV is an STD. Thus sexuality and morality are inescapably part of the conversation.
Far more important and immediate that sexuality and morality is practicality. And the fact is that morality doesn't cure or even slow the spread of STDs. Look to abstinence only AIDS prevention education in countries with high prevalence. They have a far, far higher instance of infection than areas which provide practical prevention advice and really, the only thing bstinence only AIDS prevention education has achieved is a higher instance of child-brides (the younger they are, the better chance they're a virgin).
It's only ineffective if it's not followed.
But it's not. It never ever has been. Ergo, it does not work and other options need to be explored.7 -
stanmann571 wrote: »counting_kilojoules wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Or we could just promote more responsible behavior instead of vaccinating children against an STD.
Even when the ideal was sex with one person until you died it didn't often happen. I really don't think you've got a chance of getting anyone to follow that kind of behaviour now. And if you don't? HPV is so common, you're pretty much guaranteed to get it.
The ideal hasn’t changed.
Really? Because I certainly don't want my first boyfriend back!
Anyway, ideals are stupid things to base health risks on. Especially when not everyone agrees on them. If we have a vaccine that works, I'd rather use that than hope that everyone stops having sex (especially since, historically speaking, people have always had sex, even when the risks were far greater. Why when the risks are far lower would people stop having it now?)5 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »I figured that's what he was saying. Wasn't it? To teach your kids some responsible behaviors? And that being with only one person in your whole life was the ideals still?
I took that is him saying that if people were responsible enough to not be with anyone else until they found someone to marry.. but since a lot of marriages end within a few years you would then have to give the marriage some wait time that this is how you would not have to be vaccinated for HPV
That might be what he plans to teach his children. I don't see how that has anything to do with anything anyone else should or should not be doing.
I'm questioning the paradigm of shoulds regarding sexual behavior.
Furthermore, the issue of the vaccine isn't related to morality.
Of course it is.
HPV is an STD. Thus sexuality and morality are inescapably part of the conversation.
Far more important and immediate that sexuality and morality is practicality. And the fact is that morality doesn't cure or even slow the spread of STDs. Look to abstinence only AIDS prevention education in countries with high prevalence. They have a far, far higher instance of infection than areas which provide practical prevention advice and really, the only thing bstinence only AIDS prevention education has achieved is a higher instance of child-brides (the younger they are, the better chance they're a virgin).
It's only ineffective if it's not followed.
But it's not. It never ever has been. Ergo, it does not work and other options need to be explored.
Funny though how the out-of-wedlock birthrates and STDs in Western societies were dramatically lower 100 years ago. And that was long before the easy availability of pharmaceutical birth control, legal abortion on demand and the almost complete saturation of moral relativism in those same Western societies today.
Isn't it possible though that 100 years ago, out-of-wedlock babies were claimed as the grandparents' child or forced people into shotgun weddings so were never actually reported even though they technically happened?
And isn't it possible that 100 years ago many people had undiagnosed STDs, whether due to fear of anyone knowing or simply not having access to a diagnosis?
Not to mention I don't think there's any good record of how many illegal abortions were being performed 100 years ago.15 -
Cancer sucks! Even if your a hooker I personally don't wish cancer on you! Prevention is amazing.....even for those people who listened to their parents and saved themselves for marriage only to be given HPV by an unfaithful spouse. Yeah, christian folks sin too
8 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »I figured that's what he was saying. Wasn't it? To teach your kids some responsible behaviors? And that being with only one person in your whole life was the ideals still?
I took that is him saying that if people were responsible enough to not be with anyone else until they found someone to marry.. but since a lot of marriages end within a few years you would then have to give the marriage some wait time that this is how you would not have to be vaccinated for HPV
That might be what he plans to teach his children. I don't see how that has anything to do with anything anyone else should or should not be doing.
I'm questioning the paradigm of shoulds regarding sexual behavior.
Furthermore, the issue of the vaccine isn't related to morality.
Of course it is.
HPV is an STD. Thus sexuality and morality are inescapably part of the conversation.
Far more important and immediate that sexuality and morality is practicality. And the fact is that morality doesn't cure or even slow the spread of STDs. Look to abstinence only AIDS prevention education in countries with high prevalence. They have a far, far higher instance of infection than areas which provide practical prevention advice and really, the only thing bstinence only AIDS prevention education has achieved is a higher instance of child-brides (the younger they are, the better chance they're a virgin).
It's only ineffective if it's not followed.
But it's not. It never ever has been. Ergo, it does not work and other options need to be explored.
Funny though how the out-of-wedlock birthrates and STDs in Western societies were dramatically lower 100 years ago. And that was long before the easy availability of pharmaceutical birth control, legal abortion on demand and the almost complete saturation of moral relativism in those same Western societies today.
Isn't it possible though that 100 years ago, out-of-wedlock babies were claimed as the grandparents' child or forced people into shotgun weddings so were never actually reported even though they technically happened?
And isn't it possible that 100 years ago many people had undiagnosed STDs, whether due to fear of anyone knowing or simply not having access to a diagnosis?
Not to mention I don't think there's any good record of how many illegal abortions were being performed 100 years ago.
Exactly.
I read an article recently about an unmarried mothers and childrens' home in Ireland. Pregnant girls and women were sent there until they gave birth. The conditions were horrible and a lot of the children died. I imagine a lot of the girls went back to their lives rather traumatised and never told anyone what had happened.
My great, great grandmother was born out of wedlock. I guess there was nowhere to send her mother in a small rural community in Australia back then (and no hiding it either). People don't change much and no matter how much we romanticise the past people were having sex. Since the consequences are so much less now, why would they suddenly stop now, after all this time? Especially, since for an increasing number of people, there isn't a moral reason anymore either.2 -
counting_kilojoules wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »I figured that's what he was saying. Wasn't it? To teach your kids some responsible behaviors? And that being with only one person in your whole life was the ideals still?
I took that is him saying that if people were responsible enough to not be with anyone else until they found someone to marry.. but since a lot of marriages end within a few years you would then have to give the marriage some wait time that this is how you would not have to be vaccinated for HPV
That might be what he plans to teach his children. I don't see how that has anything to do with anything anyone else should or should not be doing.
I'm questioning the paradigm of shoulds regarding sexual behavior.
Furthermore, the issue of the vaccine isn't related to morality.
Of course it is.
HPV is an STD. Thus sexuality and morality are inescapably part of the conversation.
Far more important and immediate that sexuality and morality is practicality. And the fact is that morality doesn't cure or even slow the spread of STDs. Look to abstinence only AIDS prevention education in countries with high prevalence. They have a far, far higher instance of infection than areas which provide practical prevention advice and really, the only thing bstinence only AIDS prevention education has achieved is a higher instance of child-brides (the younger they are, the better chance they're a virgin).
It's only ineffective if it's not followed.
But it's not. It never ever has been. Ergo, it does not work and other options need to be explored.
Funny though how the out-of-wedlock birthrates and STDs in Western societies were dramatically lower 100 years ago. And that was long before the easy availability of pharmaceutical birth control, legal abortion on demand and the almost complete saturation of moral relativism in those same Western societies today.
Isn't it possible though that 100 years ago, out-of-wedlock babies were claimed as the grandparents' child or forced people into shotgun weddings so were never actually reported even though they technically happened?
And isn't it possible that 100 years ago many people had undiagnosed STDs, whether due to fear of anyone knowing or simply not having access to a diagnosis?
Not to mention I don't think there's any good record of how many illegal abortions were being performed 100 years ago.
Exactly.
I read an article recently about an unmarried mothers and childrens' home in Ireland. Pregnant girls and women were sent there until they gave birth. The conditions were horrible and a lot of the children died. I imagine a lot of the girls went back to their lives rather traumatised and never told anyone what had happened.
My great, great grandmother was born out of wedlock. I guess there was nowhere to send her mother in a small rural community in Australia back then (and no hiding it either). People don't change much and no matter how much we romanticise the past people were having sex. Since the consequences are so much less now, why would they suddenly stop now, after all this time? Especially, since for an increasing number of people, there isn't a moral reason anymore either.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3004949/mass-grave-containing-remains-of-babies-discovered-in-sewage-tank-at-notorious-mother-and-baby-home-where-800-children-died/
Ah, it was a better time...13 -
stanmann571 wrote: »Or we could just promote more responsible behavior instead of vaccinating children against an STD.
Schools and parents are constantly promoting responsible behaviour when it comes to sexual intercourse. If by "responsible behaviour" you actually mean promoting abstinence I think you're wasting your breath. Morality has no bearing here. Who decided "saving" yourself til marriage was the right thing to do?6 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »I figured that's what he was saying. Wasn't it? To teach your kids some responsible behaviors? And that being with only one person in your whole life was the ideals still?
I took that is him saying that if people were responsible enough to not be with anyone else until they found someone to marry.. but since a lot of marriages end within a few years you would then have to give the marriage some wait time that this is how you would not have to be vaccinated for HPV
That might be what he plans to teach his children. I don't see how that has anything to do with anything anyone else should or should not be doing.
I'm questioning the paradigm of shoulds regarding sexual behavior.
Furthermore, the issue of the vaccine isn't related to morality.
Of course it is.
HPV is an STD. Thus sexuality and morality are inescapably part of the conversation.
Far more important and immediate that sexuality and morality is practicality. And the fact is that morality doesn't cure or even slow the spread of STDs. Look to abstinence only AIDS prevention education in countries with high prevalence. They have a far, far higher instance of infection than areas which provide practical prevention advice and really, the only thing bstinence only AIDS prevention education has achieved is a higher instance of child-brides (the younger they are, the better chance they're a virgin).
It's only ineffective if it's not followed.
But it's not. It never ever has been. Ergo, it does not work and other options need to be explored.
Funny though how the out-of-wedlock birthrates and STDs in Western societies were dramatically lower 100 years ago. And that was long before the easy availability of pharmaceutical birth control, legal abortion on demand and the almost complete saturation of moral relativism in those same Western societies today.
Isn't it possible though that 100 years ago, out-of-wedlock babies were claimed as the grandparents' child or forced people into shotgun weddings so were never actually reported even though they technically happened?
And isn't it possible that 100 years ago many people had undiagnosed STDs, whether due to fear of anyone knowing or simply not having access to a diagnosis?
Not to mention I don't think there's any good record of how many illegal abortions were being performed 100 years ago.
The bottom line is there were social stigmas inflicted on people who were promiscuous (multiple sex partners before or outside of marriage, and in the case of women any sex partners before or outside of marriage).
Those stigmas were powerful, emotionally painful and economically devastating and people sought to avoid them for reasons of common sense. So they behaved and kept their pants on a whole lot more often than people do now. And I'm pretty sure anecdotally, that's well understood by anyone willing to face the historical reality of Western societies on an aggregate level. Lefties think such incentivizing consequences were and are awful, unfair, barbaric and archaic. Even though such attitudes preserved reasonably good reproductive health and traditional family cohesion, the building blocks of any first world society. Conservatives differ. So there's that.
Personally I think Western societies are so degraded and degenerate that there's no coming back from where we are and it's only going to get worse. The levels of sexually transmitted disease have never been higher. And I suspect there will be plenty more yet to be identified or yet to develop due to overwhelmingly sexually glutinous attitudes with potentially catastrophic outcomes.
And I'm mostly coming from the perspective of observation. Personally, I'm an outlier. I'm a late middle age female who consciously chose not to have children without regret and would probably not be fit for most traditional marriage approaches as I'm naturally quite dominant, bow to no domestic authority other than my own and am unrepentantly non conformist in many ways.
This is a serious question. Do you honestly believe that people used to keep their pants on when they feared society's shame?
Are you just specifically talking about the turn of the last century? A specific place in the world? I can't think of any period of history I'm aware of (so western world for the most part) where it looks like that is true. Maybe I'm misunderstanding.
Just want to add I do wish people would be more responsible and careful. But I don't believe even as a religious person that the ideal is one lifetime partner. And I don't see what any of this has to do with a vaccine that can keep people from getting cervical cancer.6 -
And no "good girls" get raped, either. Or maybe it's that rapists don't have STDs?18
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions