A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » Kids Health
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Women in Government, Merck's Trojan Horse: Part Three in a Series on the Politics and PR of Cervical Cancer



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 23rd 07, 03:55 PM posted to alt.support.breast-implant,misc.health.alternative,talk.politics.medicine,ca.politics,misc.kids.health
Ilena Rose
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,139
Default Women in Government, Merck's Trojan Horse: Part Three in a Series on the Politics and PR of Cervical Cancer

http://ilena-rosenthal.blogspot.com/...cer-while.html


Women in Government, Merck's Trojan Horse: Part Three in a Series on
the Politics and PR of Cervical Cancer
http://www.prwatch.org/node/6232
By Judith Siers-Poisson
The Center for Media and Democracy

Tuesday 10 July 2007

In parts one and two of this four part series, "Setting the Stage"
[1], and "Research, Develop, and Sell, Sell, Sell" [2], we've looked
at the basic facts of Human papillomavirus (HPV) and its link to
cervical cancer, and the Merck [3] vaccine Gardasil [4] that is touted
as the first ever vaccine against cancer. We examined the PR and
marketing push for Gardasil that began even before FDA approval, and
two non-profit organizations that helped Merck exploit their current
corner on the HPV vaccine market.

In this article, we'll analyze the push for mandated HPV
vaccination of adolescent girls that is taking place at the state
level throughout the U.S., and the non-profit organization, Women in
Government [5] (WIG). WIG has been Merck's non-profit front and direct
channel to state-level legislators who are the key to enacting
mandates.

The Push for Mandates, and the Pushback

As reported previously, Merck laid the PR and "education"
groundwork for Gardasil well before FDA approval was granted in June
2006. But even with FDA approval and the strong recommendation of the
Advisory Committee of Immunization Practices at the federal level,
mandatory vaccination was not a given since the power to enact such
requirements lies in the hands of state legislators. Merck was working
behind the scenes on that front as well, and moved quickly to persuade
policymakers with the authority to mandate vaccination for 11 to 12
year old girls. Within a few months of FDA approval, almost twenty
states had legislation pending that would mandate vaccination against
HPV. Merck must have felt like they had won the lottery when within a
month, the Centers for Disease Control [6] (CDC)'s Advisory Committee
of Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended [7] that 11 and 12 year
olds be targeted for routine vaccination, and all women 12-26 years
old be encouraged to be vaccinated. Merck and Gardasil were on a rll,
thanks in large part to Women in Government [8].

According to their website [9], "Women in Government is a national
501(c)(3), non-profit, bi-partisan organization of women state
legislators providing leadership opportunities, networking, expert
forums, and educational resources to address and resolve complex
public policy issues." The campaigns that they feature on their home
page deal with kidney health, Medicare preventive services, higher
education policy, and the "Challenge to Eliminate Cervical Cancer,
[10]" which was publicly launched in 2004.

Governor and Mrs. Rick Perry of Texas. Molly Ivins liked to call
him "Good Hair" Perry.On February 2, 2007, Texas Governor Rick Perry
[11], against the wishes of his conservative base and to the surprise
of critics, signed an executive order mandating HPV vaccination for
girls entering seventh grade. Then, unfortunately for Perry and Merck,
details of his many connections with both Merck and Women in
Government became public. Ellen Goodman of the Boston Globe noted
[12], "It turned out that Perry's former chief of staff is now a
lobbyist for Merck. Did that look bad? Whoa, Nellie. Did it look bad
that Merck had funded an organization of women legislators backing
similar bills? Whoa, Merck." USA Today reported [13] that Perry's
current chief of staff's mother-in-law, Texas Republican State
Representative Dianne White Delisi, is a state director for Women in
Government. Perry's wife, Anita, a nurse by training, addressed a WIG
summit on cervical cancer in Atlanta in November 2005. Perry also
received $6,000 fom Merck's political action committee during his
re-election campaign.

Merck announced on February 20, 2007 that it would no longer lobby
directly for vaccine mandates at the state level. The New York Times
quoted [14] Dr. Richard M. Haupt, executive director for medical
affairs in Merck's vaccine division as saying, "Our goal is to prevent
cervical cancer. Our goal is to reach as many females as possible.
Right now, school requirements and Merck's involvement in that are
being viewed as a distraction to that goal." Dr. Haupt did say,
however, that Merck would continue providing health officials and
legislators with education about the vaccine and would continue
lobbying for more financing for vaccines in general. When asked how
much Merck had spent on its Gardasil lobbying efforts, Haupt declined
to name a figure.

Women in Government: Picking Up the Slack for Merck

So who is this group receiving Merck funding and pushing for
vaccine mandates across the country? As noted above, Women in
Government [15] had identified cervical cancer as a focus of their
work as early as 2004. Available on the WIG web site is a legislative
policy toolkit. It provides legislators with sample legislation
written by their colleagues in other states, maps showing states with
cervical cancer related bills pending or laws enacted, WIG's fact
sheets on HPV and cervical cancer, and a letter from WIG President
Susan Crosby. While not focused solely on introducing and enacting HPV
vaccine mandates, they are a main component of the WIG campaign and
something by which they measure success. According to a map that WIG
provides on their site, as of June, 2007, twenty-three states and the
District of Columbia have introduced HPV vaccine mandate legislation,
in addition to Virginia, which has already enacted legislation.

WIG's non-profit and non-partisan status has given them access,
status and influence beyond the reach of Merck, the vaccine
manufacturer. Debbie Halvorson, the Democratic majority leader of the
Illinois State Senate, had a hysterectomy due to HPV infection. She
told the New York Times [16] that, "she would continue to press for
the bill, but that it was a good idea on Merck's part to stop
lobbying. 'If the people out there are thinking that Merck is doing
all this, and pushing our buttons, they need to just step away. The
fact that I'm doing what I'm doing has nothing to do with Merck.'"
Halvorson is listed as a current member of Women in Government on the
group's website [17]. Health Policy Monitor [18], the website of an
international non-profit network on health policy and reform, reports
that in California in late 2006, Democratic Assemblywoman Sally Lieber
introduced a bill that would require all girls entering sixth grade to
be vaccinated against HPV beginning in July 2008. "Assemblywoman
Lieber has pblicly stated that she drafted the HPV mandate for
California because of the unique opportunity it presented to prevent
cancer with a vaccine-something that has never before been possible. …
Merck representatives requested a meeting with Lieber before she
introduced the HPV bill, but Lieber declined. Lieber did meet with
Women in Government, unaware of their ties to Merck."

Straight From the President's Mouth: An Interview with Susan
Crosby

WIG President Susan Crosby at a Challenge to Eliminate Cervical
Cancer Campaign press conference, January 2005.In March 2007, I
interviewed Susan Crosby, the President of WIG. Crosby first served on
the board of WIG and then joined the staff as Deputy Executive
Director in 2002. Crosby was a Democratic member of the Indiana House
of Representatives for 12 years prior to her tenure with WIG. In 2005
Crosby's total compensation package from WIG was $123,925.

When asked what WIG offers its members, Crosby noted that besides
the networking opportunities, WIG itself serves as a resource in
several ways, including, "having legislators be able to call in and
get totally unbiased information … to be able to make decisions that
are the best for their state." She continued, "That's one thing that
we at Women in Government have always tried to do, is try to give them
the full picture, the balanced picture – the good, the bad, and the
ugly. Because nothing's worse than to give a legislator, a woman
legislator in particular, part of the story, and have her go back to
her state, standing up at the mike, proposing something, and all of a
sudden this question comes flying out of left field and she has no
idea what it was."

But is WIG dedicated to giving women legislators unbiased,
balanced information, or in giving WIG's corporate contributors access
to the legislators that can significantly help or harm their interests
at the state level? In 2004, more than 20 WIG funders were
pharmaceutical companies or entities heavily invested in health care
issues that could come before state legislators. A short list includes
both Merck & Co., Inc and Merck Vaccine, GlaxoSmithKline [19] (which
will soon have the second HPV vaccine on the market), and Digene
Corporation (which manufactures an HPV test). Other drug interests
listed as donors to WIG include Novartis [20], Eli Lilly [21],
AstraZeneca [22], Bayer [23] Healthcare, Pfizer [24], Bristol-Myers
Squibb [25] (both the company and their foundation), and
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America [26], also known
as PhRMA, one of the largest and most influential lobbying
organizations in Washington representing 48 drug companies.

WIG's funding rosters for 2005 and 2006 have minor additions and
deletions, but Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, and Digene remain constant. It
appears that word has gotten around that WIG is ready, willing and
able to cooperate with those invested heavily in health care policy -
their current list of donors for 2006 [27] includes more than 40
companies or organizations involved in the health field.

How did HPV and cervical cancer rise to the top of the short list
of issues that WIG prioritizes? Crosby said that health has always
been a focus of WIG's work. "Four years ago we heard about HPV, and I
must tell you, at that time we didn't know the difference between HPV
and HIV. We couldn't even say 'Human Papilloma Virus' and they were
saying 'Oh! This is the virus that causes cervical cancer.'" WIG
created a task force to look into it and "found out about this test
that, used along with your Pap test, could predict 99.9% whether you
had this virus and we thought, 'Oh my golly! Talk about some
opportunities here. This is unbelievable information and we need to
make this available to all women!' They need to know, when they go in
to their doctor, to say, 'I want an HPV test as well as my Pap.'"

When I raised the issue of Merck pushing for vaccine mandates when
it is currently the only vaccine provider, Crosby responded that
GlaxoSmithKline has now also presented their drug, Cervarix, for FDA
approval. When I noted that Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, and Digene, were
all WIG funders, Crosby responded "and so is Eli Lilly, Bristol Meyer
Squibb - you could go on and on because of the health issues that we
have championed for years. Obviously, we are going to attract the
attention of that particular industry."

WIG funders also include energy concerns, casinos, alcohol,
telecom interests, Big Tobacco, and lobby firms – all of which could
be either significantly helped or harmed by state-level legislation.
Does Crosby feel such funding compromises WIG, or creates the
impression that WIG might have divided loyalties or interests? "I
don't," Crosby replied. "Because number one, I think it shows that
there is not one single industry or one corporation that is driving
Women In Government. … This is an affirmation that we are a totally
unbiased, unprejudiced group, that we are trying to gain information –
the pros and the cons – on all issues and being able to present that
to our legislators for them to be able to make informed decisions on
good public policy."

Crosby emphasized that the funding provided by corporations and
industries are unrestricted grants. "To me," she explained, "I don't
see it as a conflict of interest because they're not funding a
particular legislator or a particular mission." But the funders are
getting direct access to state legislators, in part through WIG's
Legislative Business Roundtable. Crosby explained, "They are people
that come together to help the women legislators identify what the
cutting edge issues are. For instance, we might have someone from
Verizon [28] saying, 'OK, we're looking at telephone deregulation –
this may be an issue you want to get more information on to help
educate your legislators.' Because there's no way that we have the
expertise to know what some of the coming issues are going to be. So
they float those topics out there and we say, 'Oh, that's something we
definitely need more information on.'" I asked whether, since Verizon
is a WIG funder, it is safe to say that funders are among the members
of the Rountable. Crosby confirmed that they are.

Just because WIG is concerned about health doesn't mean they would
refuse funding from Big Tobacco.WIG is also taking funding from the
likes of Altria [29] (formerly Philip Morris) and beer maker
Anheuser-Busch [30]. Not exactly stars in the health promotion
pantheon. Referring back to her assertion that WIG wants to provide
women legislators with the good and the bad, the pro and the con, of
each issue, I asked if there is really a pro side to Big Tobacco,
pointing out that on an archived web page listing previous WIG
funders, they listed Altria Group just across from a box that read
"November is Lung Cancer Awareness Month." Crosby replied, "We're
putting the message out there, and it's up to Altria. They know that
we are going to continue to give both the pros and the cons on that
particular topic and they're not going to dictate to Women in
Government, just like no business dictates to Women in Government. …
It's up to Altria if they still want to come to the table and they
do."

"Perceived" conflicts of interest are not enough for WIG to refuse
corporate funding. "I'm sorry that it has happened," Crosby said, "but
I would say that if you know our women legislators, ... you know that
no one particular person or industry is going to tell them or dictate
to them what they're going to do. It's just so sad that they've lost
the focus that this might be the medical breakthrough of the century –
a vaccine against cancer."

Crosby predicts that, when years in the future people look back at
this debate, "All this hoopla will be moot." But some former WIG
supporters disagree. In early January 2007 WIG held their annual state
directors conference on San Marco Island, Florida. Two of those
attending were Marilyn Canavan and Andrea Boland, both Democratic
state legislators from Maine. Both were surprised by the tone of the
sessions devoted to HPV, cervical cancer and mandatory vaccination.
Canavan later told Terry J. Allen, who was writing for CorpWatch [31],
'The tenor of presentations - they were not discussions ... (they)
seemed one-sided to me ... I remember thinking as I was leaving the
meeting, 'I just don't want to do this ... we need to have public
dialogue.'

"Boland also reported a 'pull to get on board [promoting
vaccination]... and when I raised questions, the response was 'Do you
want your daughter to die of cancer?'" As a first-time attendee,
Boland was struck by the role that corporations played in determining
the policy priorities for WIG. "'When discussing what the agenda for
next year would be,' participants were told to 'wait to see who's
funding things.' Similarly before fixing the program for next year,
they 'had to see what the sponsors want.'"

Canavan, a four-term legislator and a WIG state director, resigned
from WIG on March 2, 2007. "An organization that stands to profit,
like a pharmaceutical company, shouldn't be driving the health agenda
in the public realm. You see so many front organizations, I'm not
going to say Women in Government is one, but it matters who's funding
them." She concluded, "When we lose trust in companies like
pharmaceuticals or a group like Women in Government, we start to
become suspicious about everything. We need to have public dialogue.
The point is not that the vaccine is bad, but that the public agenda
has all been company-driven."

How It Plays Out in the States: Wisconsin as a Case Study

Wisconsin State Senator Lena TaylorIn Wisconsin, State Senator
Lena Taylor, a Democrat representing Milwaukee, plans to introduce
legislation that would ensure HPV education and would lay the
groundwork for an eventual HPV vaccination mandate. Taylor is a
long-time member of Women in Government.

One concern regarding Gardasil and mandating its use is the
creation of a false sense of security for girls and their parents. For
example, on Senator Taylor's website (see below) until June 2007 was a
statement boasting of the the introduction of legislation "that would
add the vaccination for HPV, which is linked to 99.7% of cervical
cancer cases, to the list of required vaccines for Wisconsin girls
entering sixth grade. This legislation can end cervical cancer, which
kills 3,700 women each year, in the next generation of Wisconsin
women." Asked about the clear overstatement of the vaccine's benefit
Taylor's Legislative Assistant Jeff Pertl conceded that the original
posting was in error. "We've changed the language on that, to be
candid. … The initial number we were given by the medical community
was that 99.7% figure. The general number we've been seeing in the
press is 70%, which I think is a more conservative number, and that's
number we've been using now. I would argue that I think it's higher
than tat, but in general we've moved to the more conservative number."

On the issue of negative publicity caused by Merck's heavy-handed
lobbying efforts, Pertl said, "We've consciously tried to keep some
distance from Merck, you know they got some national attention, but
they haven't really been involved here in Wisconsin. … We're trying to
make this about the public health issue. Our bill's bi-partisan and
we're trying to stay out of the quagmire wherever we can."

Regarding the links between the drug companies and Women in
Government, of which Senator Taylor is a long-time member. Pertl
dismissed a correlation between her membership and her work on this
legislation. He said that "while Women in Government did push this
issue in a lot of areas," Taylor's office had gotten more information
and model legislation from the National Conference on State
Legislatures [32] (NCSL) than from WIG. "We didn't get a lot of
contact from Women In Government, and it certainly wasn't like a
lobbying effort, at least not that we were aware of. Again, I can't
speak for the whole country, but I suspect it's a bit overblown, but
it's hard to say." Like WIG, NCSL is also funded by corporations,
including Merck and GlaxoSmithKline.

Did Senator Taylor disclose to her colleagues that she is a member
of a group that receives financial support from those corporations?
Pertl replied, "We didn't actually know that Women in Government
receives funding from Merck until the news story broke, much like
everybody else. We just didn't pay that much attention to the
finances, quite frankly." Addressing the question of revealing WIG's
funding to prevent any perceived conflict of interest, Pertl
continued, "When we found out, we had a conversation with others –
there are a lot of members of the legislature here that are members of
Women in Government … it really wasn't a major concern here."

Pertl concluded with this point. "I think there are two things
that are spiking concern right now, if I can be candid. One is that
HPV is a sexually transmitted disease. If this were transmitted in any
other way, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. … The
second problem is that if you pass the law today, the news story is
today, even if the implementation is two years from now. … And I think
that's why we might do an education bill first. … Because here's the
most important thing – the public has to have faith."

Meaningful Analysis: Missing In Action

Legislative Aide Jeff Pertl touched on an important, and
unfortunate, aspect of the HPV vaccine issue. Within a polarized
political and religious climate, some conservative organizations and
leaders are against the mandating of HPV vaccines due at least in part
to a concern about encouraging promiscuity, and this has produced a
knee-jerk reaction. Instead of carefully examining the issue, the
response from some has been to endorse the vaccine simply on the
grounds that if the Right is against it, they should be for it.

For example, in the Spring 2007 issue of Ms. magazine [33], this
response, and the rampant oversimplification and misinterpretation of
the HPV vaccines use and efficacy, is apparent. The author, Cindy
Wright, discussed the overturning of Texas Governor Rick Perry's
executive order mandating vaccination. But she credits the "firestorm"
to social conservatives, not to the controversial ties between Perry,
his wife, Women in Government, and Merck outlined above. In response
to the $400 price tag quoted for the three shot regimen (and it might
cost even more), she opines, "Even if I had to pay full price, how
could I say no to the first-ever cancer vaccine? How could anyone? Who
would consider not giving our daughters the best chance of avoiding a
deadly disease?" In fact, regular Pap tests are still the best way to
detect pre-cancerous conditions and to treat them well before they
become cervical cancer. Wright's tone is reminiscent of George W. Bush
claiming, "You're either with us, or with the terrorists." Te
implication is that if you're not running to get your daughter
vaccinated, someone should call Child Protective Services.

The Ms. article ends with exactly the attitude that the Gardasil
PR has encouraged, and Merck has been loath to correct. Wright
concludes, "Meanwhile, my daughter has gotten her second booster.
That's one less life-threatening illness to worry about." Is it any
coincidence that Merck's crowning PR push was built around the phrase
"One Less"? Let's hope that Wright's daughter does her homework more
thoroughly than her mother and doesn't assume that she is now fully
protected against cervical cancer. That misperception is what is truly
life-threatening.

It is possible to be supportive of the vaccine and widespread
access to it without favoring mandated vaccinations. And it is
certainly not just the Religious Right that opposes HPV vaccine
mandates being put in place at the state level. In February 2007, the
American Academy of Family Physicians [34] cautioned that it was
"premature to consider school entry mandates" for Gardasil "until such
time as the long term safety with widespread use, stability of supply,
and economic issues have been clarified. USA Today quoted [35] Joseph
Bocchini, chairman of the American Academy of Pediatrics' Committee on
Infectious Diseases, as affirming Merck's February 2007 announcement
to discontinue its direct lobbying efforts in favor of vaccine
mandates. "At this point," Bocchini said, "we really don't know
whether we even need to consider a mandate. We need to get some data
over time."

Even though middle school girls were not the focus of the research
and development stages, they have become the target for vaccine
mandates.Dr. Diane Harper, whom I quoted at length previously in this
series, has serious concerns about mandating the HPV vaccine for
middle-school aged girls. Dr. Harper was involved in designing and
implementing clinical trials for both Merck's Gardasil vaccine and
GlaxoSmithKline's Cervarix. According to Dr. Harper, eleven- and
twelve-year olds have had safety testing, but not efficacy testing.
This means that there is no way to tell how long Gardasil will provide
protection, or when a booster shot might be needed.

So why focus on that age group? "That age range was targeted
because the manufacturer has this vaccine, and they need to recoup
their R&D (research and development) costs. ... But how do you
administer this vaccine? How do you package it and put it out there so
that it makes sense to the public and so that the right public health
programs and different sub section of the medical community 'own' the
vaccine?"

Part of the answer is that mid-adolescence is a good age because
vaccinations given in early childhood are coming due for a booster,
and there is a growing realization that many risky behaviors and
conditions, like smoking, depression, and obesity, are emerging at the
that age as well. The manufacturers and the CDC decided to add the HPV
vaccine to a platform of vaccines to give at that age, including
meningitis, pertussis and tetanus updates, pneumococcal vaccine." Dr.
Harper continued, "I think that's a very noble thought, and that it's
a thoughtful way of thinking of where to place the vaccine. The
problem is that in so doing, you lose the concept of what the vaccine
was for, the actual power of the vaccine. It gets folded into the
bigger purpose of helping adolescents have a better health life. But
you lose the fact that women continue to get HPV infections throughout
their lives - there is no one age when cervical cancer stops. It
pigeon-holes the vaccine into something for twelve-year olds, it also
pgeon-holes it into a wedge to start talking about sexuality."

I asked Dr. Harper to explain her opposition to mandating the
vaccine when she was prominently featured on the agenda of a Women in
Government summit on cervical cancer held in Bay Harbor, MI in July
2005. She replied, "My talks and discussions at that meeting were
identifying the benefits (not the limitations) of the HPV vaccines as
they were being developed. My talks served as an educational platform
so that the benefits scientists were seeing from the clinical trials
could be explained to the legislators in a way they could take back to
their legislative bodies." She continued, "At the time I was working
with WIG, the concept of mandates was either not discussed or very
embryonic in form. ... There was not consensus on the age at which to
vaccinate women with the HPV vaccine, this would not come from the
ACIP until November 2006 with the wording that 11-12 year olds would
be targeted for routine vaccination, and all women 12-26 years old
would also be encouraged to be vaccinated. The Merck representativeto
WIG was strongly supporting the concept of mandates later in the WIG
meetings and providing verbiage on which the legislators could base
their proposals."

Dr. Harper reiterated her position to "fully support the use of
the HPV vaccine for women of all ages, and support health insurance,
third party payers to cover this for preventive women's health care. I
do not support the concept of mandates for 12 year olds that keep
children from school if there is insufficient access to the vaccine."
She also indicated that she feels strongly that individual women
legislators have a genuine concern for women's health.

WIG Isn't Alone: Other Ways to Buy Access to State Legislators

Women in Government is not alone in providing its corporate
funders with direct access to the state legislators that can help or
harm their corporate interests through state-level legislation. The
National Foundation for Women Legislators [36], which works with women
in all levels of elected offices, unabashedly outlines the access to
legislators that Corporate Membership levels [37], ranging from $5,000
to $50,000, will buy. At the $50,000 President level, corporate
members can "host (a) conference call with key legislative members on
policy issue" and can also mail to the NFWL membership list four times
during the year. President and Senator ($35,000) level corporate
members can also participate in NFWL leadership activities. NFWL
stopped listing its corporate funders on its website in 2002, but at
that time, they included [38] Merck, Pfizer, SmithKline (pre-merger
with Glaxo), PhRMA and other pharmaceutical interests, not to mention
Philip Morris, Enron [39], the Chlorine Chemistry Council [40], the
Natinal Rifle Association [41], and Exxon [42]. In a 1999 fundraising
mailer [43] sent to tobacco company Philip Morris [44], now Altria
[45], NFWL promises that "by joining the Corporate Leadership Circle
of the National Foundation for Women Legislators, you will have the
opportunity to lend your expertise and point-of-view to lawmakers at a
number of high-profile, yearly events."

The NCSL Foundation, which is the 501 (C) 3 non-profit that raises
funds to support the programs of the National Conference of State
Legislatures [46], outlines the benefits on becoming a gold ($10,000)
or silver ($5,000) sponsor of NCSL. Benefits include varying levels of
access to the NCSL leadership and to the member legislators, including
being able to serve on one of the Conference's sub-committees. The
NCSL Foundation lists its funders [47] as including the usual suspects
of pharmaceutical firms (Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and others,
including the lobby group PhRMA), in addition to energy, telecom, and
other deep-pocketed interests. NCSL has a briefing page on HPV [48]
and what is happening at the state level, but does not appear to have
yet taken a pro-mandate stance.

The American Legislative Exchange Council [49], a network of
conservative legislators that pushes legislation that favors big
business and rollbacks of environmental regulations, also provides
direct access and influence to its corporate funders. ALEC's Health
and Human Services task Force lists individuals from GlaxoSmithKline,
Bayer Health Care, and PhRMA as private sector representatives. At
their April 2007, Task Force Summit meeting, the co-chairs announced
the formation [50] of a one-time Health and Human Service Working
Group on HPV vaccination mandates. This working group will present on
the mandate issue at the ALEC annual meeting at the end of July in
Philadelphia.

What Have We Learned?

These first three articles on the Politics and PR of Cervical
Cancer have attempted to untangle the issues surrounding an important
health care topic as it has played out in the U.S. We started with a
basic analysis of the facts around cervical cancer, and what Merck has
to gain by having the first vaccine on the market. We've looked at the
award-winning PR campaign that Edelman [51] produced for Merck and the
non-profits, Cancer Research and Prevention Foundation [52] and Step
Up Women's Network [53], that helped create a culture of fear couched
in the empowerment of women and girls. We've looked at the lobbying
efforts to push for state mandates of HPV vaccination which has been
channeled through industry-funded non-profits like Women in
Government. And we've outlined the concerns that all the hype and spin
are a grave disservice to women's health. Merck's greed, and the
willingness of its partners to go along with an industry driven
campaign, have compromised the actual promise of the vaccine.

In the fourth and final article, "Profit Knows No Borders, Selling
Gardasil to the Rest of the World," we'll examine developments in
other countries around the issue of HPV vaccination.

Source URL: http://www.prwatch.org/node/6232
Links:
[1] http://prwatch.org/node/6186
[2] http://prwatch.org/node/6208
[3] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Merck
[4] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Gardasil
[5] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php..._in_Government
[6]
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...isease_Control
[7] http://www.cdc.gov/od/oc/media/pressrel/r060629.htm
[8] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php..._in_Government
[9] http://womeningovernment.org
[10] http://www.womeningovernment.org/prevention/
[11] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rick_Perry
[12]
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edi...n_hpv_vaccine/
[13]
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/...tm?POE=NEWISVA
[14]
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/bu...prod=permalink
[15] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php..._in_Government
[16]
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/bu...prod=permalink
[17] http://www.womeningovernment.org/hom...ectory_000.asp
[18]
http://www.hpm.org/en/Surveys/IGH/09...st&language=en
[19] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...laxoSmithKline
[20] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Novartis
[21] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Eli_Lilly
[22] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=AstraZeneca
[23] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bayer
[24] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pfizer
[25] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...l-Myers_Squibb
[26]
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ers_of_America
[27] http://www.womeningovernment.org/hom...t_sponsors.asp
[28] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Verizon
[29] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Altria
[30] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...Anheuser-Busch
[31] http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14401
[32] http://www.ncsl.org/
[33] http://www.msmagazine.com/spring2007/
[34] http://aafp.org
[35]
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/...-vaccine_x.htm
[36] http://womenlegislators.org
[37]
http://www.womenlegislators.org/invo...p-benefits.php
[38]
http://web.archive.org/web/200212100...psponsors.html
[39] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Enron
[40]
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...mistry_Council
[41]
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...le_Association
[42] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Exxon
[43] http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jjb35c00
[44] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...=Philip_Morris
[45] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Altria
[46] http://ncsl.org
[47] http://www.ncsl.org/public/fsl/fslspon.htm
[48] http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/HPVvaccine.htm
[49]
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ange_Coun cil
[50] http://www.alec.org/2/4.html
[51] http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Edelman
[52] http://preventcancer.org
[53] http://www.suwn.org

  #2  
Old August 23rd 07, 04:52 PM posted to alt.support.breast-implant,misc.health.alternative,talk.politics.medicine,ca.politics,misc.kids.health
Myrl
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default Women in Government, Merck's Trojan Horse: Part Three in a Series on the Politics and PR of Cervical Cancer

It is estimated that between 250,000 - 290,000 women a year globally,
die from Cervical Cancer. It has also been estimated that 70% of
these are caused by HPV virus, which could be prevented with Gardasil.




  #3  
Old August 24th 07, 09:04 PM posted to alt.support.breast-implant,misc.health.alternative,talk.politics.medicine,ca.politics,misc.kids.health
JOHN
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 583
Default Women in Government, Merck's Trojan Horse: Part Three in a Series on the Politics and PR of Cervical Cancer


"Myrl" wrote in message
oups.com...
It is estimated that between 250,000 - 290,000 women a year globally,
die from Cervical Cancer. It has also been estimated that 70% of
these are caused by HPV virus, which could be prevented with Gardasil.


you should write propaganda leaflets for Merck


  #4  
Old August 24th 07, 09:50 PM posted to alt.support.breast-implant,misc.health.alternative,talk.politics.medicine,ca.politics,misc.kids.health
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 192
Default Women in Government, Merck's Trojan Horse: Part Three in a Series on the Politics and PR of Cervical Cancer

On Aug 23, 11:52 am, Myrl wrote:
It is estimated that between 250,000 - 290,000 women a year globally,
die from Cervical Cancer. It has also been estimated that 70% of
these are caused by HPV virus, which could be prevented with Gardasil.


Myrl,

If Cervical cancer is caused somewhat by HPV and this is
transmitted sexually, where does the culprit HPV reside in the male?
( I am assuming a non-gay life style, unless HPV can live on a female
finger.)

Why does the testes not rot from the HPV, or the penis fall off.
Very confusing this.

DrCee
Not a member of the church of modern medicine.

  #5  
Old August 24th 07, 09:50 PM posted to alt.support.breast-implant,misc.health.alternative,talk.politics.medicine,ca.politics,misc.kids.health
Myrl
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default Women in Government, Merck's Trojan Horse: Part Three in a Series on the Politics and PR of Cervical Cancer

On Aug 24, 1:04 pm, "JOHN" wrote:
"Myrl" wrote in message

oups.com...

It is estimated that between 250,000 - 290,000 women a year globally,
die from Cervical Cancer. It has also been estimated that 70% of
these are caused by HPV virus, which could be prevented with Gardasil.


you should write propaganda leaflets for Merck





The information I have gathered has come from reliable sources. Not
from Merck. I suggest that you research the disease statistics for
yourself!

One woman I spoke with the other day, said something poignant, "Myrl,
the anti-vac people seem to want us to all go back 100 years to a time
before we had vaccines. A time when millions and millions died from
Typhoid, Polio, Measles, Small Pox, etc. I wouldn't mind so much, if
it were they, who contracted disease first, and the doctor would put
in their files, 'Do Not Resuscitate!'"



  #6  
Old August 24th 07, 10:03 PM posted to alt.support.breast-implant,misc.health.alternative,talk.politics.medicine,ca.politics,misc.kids.health
Myrl
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default Women in Government, Merck's Trojan Horse: Part Three in a Series on the Politics and PR of Cervical Cancer

On Aug 24, 1:50 pm, wrote:
On Aug 23, 11:52 am, Myrl wrote:

It is estimated that between 250,000 - 290,000 women a year globally,
die from Cervical Cancer. It has also been estimated that 70% of
these are caused by HPV virus, which could be prevented with Gardasil.


Myrl,

If Cervical cancer is caused somewhat by HPV and this is
transmitted sexually, where does the culprit HPV reside in the male?
( I am assuming a non-gay life style, unless HPV can live on a female
finger.)

Why does the testes not rot from the HPV, or the penis fall off.
Very confusing this.

DrCee
Not a member of the church of modern medicine.



I haven't really researched symptoms in males. However, the HPV virus
does cause genital warts, which on a male would become evident fairly
soon, I would think. Quick evidence, would likely lead to quick
treatment, and possibly take care of the problem before their penis
fell off (as you put it).

I have read other material, that suggests that un-circumcised men can
carry the virus under their foreskins.

But, it would take someone with more medical and scientific background
than I, to confirm or make more absolute statements in that regard!


  #7  
Old August 24th 07, 10:35 PM posted to alt.support.breast-implant,misc.health.alternative,talk.politics.medicine,ca.politics,misc.kids.health
JOHN
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 583
Default Women in Government, Merck's Trojan Horse: Part Three in a Series on the Politics and PR of Cervical Cancer


"Myrl" wrote in message
oups.com...


One woman I spoke with the other day, said something poignant, "Myrl,
the anti-vac people seem to want us to all go back 100 years to a time
before we had vaccines. A time when millions and millions died from
Typhoid, Polio, Measles, Small Pox, etc. I wouldn't mind so much, if
it were they, who contracted disease first, and the doctor would put
in their files, 'Do Not Resuscitate!'"


You do mix with ignorant people

http://www.whale.to/a/smallpox_hoax.html


  #8  
Old August 24th 07, 10:42 PM posted to alt.support.breast-implant,misc.health.alternative,talk.politics.medicine,ca.politics,misc.kids.health
Jeff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,321
Default Women in Government, Merck's Trojan Horse: Part Three in a Serieson the Politics and PR of Cervical Cancer

JOHN wrote:
"Myrl" wrote in message
oups.com...

One woman I spoke with the other day, said something poignant, "Myrl,
the anti-vac people seem to want us to all go back 100 years to a time
before we had vaccines. A time when millions and millions died from
Typhoid, Polio, Measles, Small Pox, etc. I wouldn't mind so much, if
it were they, who contracted disease first, and the doctor would put
in their files, 'Do Not Resuscitate!'"


You do mix with ignorant people

http://www.whale.to/a/smallpox_hoax.html


She can't help it with people like you using the internet.

Jeff
  #9  
Old August 24th 07, 10:45 PM posted to alt.support.breast-implant,misc.health.alternative,talk.politics.medicine,ca.politics,misc.kids.health
Ilena Rose
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,139
Default Women in Government, Merck's Trojan Horse: Part Three in a Series on the Politics and PR of Cervical Cancer

www.BreastimplantAwareness.org/myrl.html wrote:

The information I have gathered has come from reliable sources. Not from Merck.


Thank you for admitting that Merck is not a reliable source.

Nor is Women in Government and the dozens of Vac Machine "non profits"
funded by money funneled down by Merck. They are all getting paid to
publish on as many forums as possible the identical propganda you post
here, Myrl Jeffcoat.

As far as "reliable sources" ... you have in no way proven yourself
capable of judging such. You still quote Barrett's "quackwatch"
frequently ... a partisan business to sell their "anti-quackery" point
of view via blogs, websites, and their biased books, articles and
courses.

http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.or...watchwatch.htm
  #10  
Old August 24th 07, 11:01 PM posted to alt.support.breast-implant,misc.health.alternative,talk.politics.medicine,ca.politics,misc.kids.health
Jeff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,321
Default Women in Government, Merck's Trojan Horse: Part Three in a Serieson the Politics and PR of Cervical Cancer

Ilena Rose wrote:
www.BreastimplantAwareness.org/myrl.html wrote:

The information I have gathered has come from reliable sources. Not from Merck.


Thank you for admitting that Merck is not a reliable source.


You might want to learn to read English. She didn't say Merck is not a
reliable source. Only that the information was not from Merck.

In this case, because the vaccine is made by Merck, Merck has a conflict
of interest, and, because the vaccine is from another source, the
conflict is not there.

doo-doo deleted

Jeff
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Family claims cervical-cancer vaccine caused paralysis bigvince General 0 May 19th 07 08:23 PM
Family claims cervical-cancer vaccine caused paralysis [email protected] Kids Health 0 May 18th 07 07:17 PM
Family claims cervical-cancer vaccine caused paralysis [email protected] Breastfeeding 0 May 18th 07 07:17 PM
Human Papiloma Virus may not be the Cause of Cervical Cancer JOHN Kids Health 3 March 22nd 07 12:56 AM
The Abraham Cherrix cancer story the media won't print: Harry Hoxsey's cancer cures and the US government campaign to destroy them Ilena Rose Kids Health 45 August 8th 06 07:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.