House to debate new cervical cancer immunization bill

A press release from the House Dems states:

State Representatives Bernie Buescher and Dianne Primavera, a cervical cancer survivor, recently introduced legislation to increase the availability of cervical cancer immunizations, especially to young women and low-income women. House Bill 1301 differs from Senator Williams' bill on the same topic in several significant ways. (HB 1301 will be heard in Committee on Thursday March 8, 2007.)

I discussed Williams' bill on February 1, 2007. It ran into problems and as of March 3 was "stalled in a Senate committee."

HPV vaccine faces campaigns against profits, sex

Every year about 4,000 women die from cervical cancer. Yesterday Colorado's Democratic legislature took action. A Senate committee approved a bill requiring girls to be vaccinated against HPV, an STD that causes the disease.

The Rocky's story on the situation at the Capitol reported that some oppose the bill on the grounds that the company that makes the vaccine will profit from its sale:

Opponents accused Merck & Co., manufacturer of Gardasil vaccine, of pushing similar legislation across the nation to boost its bottom line.

People are absolutely right to be suspicious of the ties between the doctors that dispense new medicines, the legislatures that mandate their use, and the companies that profit from their sale. But the Rocky's article doesn't give enough emphasis to the fact that social conservatives have been been campaigning against the vaccine for years as part of the movement's ongoing war on sex.

Time Magazine's article "Defusing the War Over the Promiscuity Vaccine" states:

The New Scientist in Britain quoted the Family Research Council's Bridget Maher warning that "giving the HPV vaccine to young women could be potentially harmful, because they may see it as a licence to engage in premarital sex."

Similarly, About.com states one reason the vaccine is controversial is that "[m]any groups feel that the HPV vaccine will encourage promiscuity among young people."

Last year The New Republic reported that the social conservative movement had begun to couch its opposition to the vaccine in the language of choice:

Instead of campaigning aggressively against the vaccine, Christian groups have adopted a subtler rhetorical strategy: saying simply that they favor "choice"--that is, allowing parents to decide whether the vaccine or abstinence is right for their children. This strategy is no less pernicious for being polite. And it could go a long way towards undermining the vaccine's potential benefits.

The point is that the war against the vaccine stems not just from the reported concerns about choice and profits, but from a deep-seated opposition to premarital sex.

Cross-posted at SquareState.

UPDATE: A telling quote from The Denver Post:

[O]pponents said it crosses a new line of government mandates and could encourage sexual promiscuity in teenagers. "This will create the perception of immunity, and sex outside of marriage will actually increase," said Ed Hanks of Colorado Right to Life.