Editorial pages on the future of HPV vaccines

A number of newspapers, both large and small, published editorials on Gardasil over the past few days. The pieces look at what lies ahead regarding the vaccine's availability, recommended use, and possible requirements. It's a good time to do so, as we're just about halfway between FDA licensure (which came June 8) and ACIP recommendations (June 30). Here's a sampling of editorial views from around the nation:

• "A major advance in women's health" (Philadelphia Inquirer): "As states address this issue in the coming months, they should remember they have a wide range of policy choices between mandatory vaccination and silence. Although abstinence is the safest choice before marriage, public health policy should not ignore the fact that nearly every person engages in sexual activity at some point in life."

• "Preventing a cancer" (Boston Globe): "But the greatest potential benefit of Merck's Gardasil vaccine will come only if parents, doctors, policymakers, public health professionals, and school officials work together to ensure that all pre-teen girls get the full vaccine regimen of three shots."

• "Vaccine will save lives" (Fort Wayne Journal Gazette): "Protecting women from cervical cancer should trump patriarchal concerns about women becoming promiscuous. Any negative reaction to a vaccine that will protect millions of women’s lives is nothing less than misogyny."

• "A vaccine that fights cancer" (Clarksville, TN Leaf Chronicle): "By all means, those families with a strong belief in sexual abstinence until marriage should share that with their children — especially with all the mass media messages that young people are constantly exposed to concerning sex. Unfortunately, though, the parents' best hopes don't always work out. It's estimated that by high school, half of all teens are sexually active. Even for a girl who is committed to abstinence before marriage, there's always the possibility that a sexual assault could leave her exposed. One also must take into account that just because a young woman waited until marriage, her groom may not have."

• "Cancer breakthrough" (Providence Journal): "Further, some conservative organizations oppose requiring the vaccine. They argue that it will promote promiscuity, and that sexual abstinence before marriage is the better route to preventing illness. That seems farfetched. Few adolescents struggling over a decision to have sex will be deterred by fears that they could contract cancer in adulthood. Moreover, depriving anyone of this life-saving vaccine for "moral" purposes is a reckless roll of the dice."