The HPV Debate

694 Words2 Pages

Cervical cancer is met with a vaccine with both pros and cons to suppress and annihilate it indefinitely. Although both Mike Adams and Arthur Allen inform the audience of the HPV vaccine, Adams vigorously argues, without evidence, that the vaccine is dangerous to humans while Allen is more sedate and discusses opposing sides to the vaccine. The HPV vaccine has its pros and cons to people that it has created debates to come down to the conclusion of a better solution for the drug companies and the people forcing to receive it. Though the HPV vaccine promises to cure cervical cancer, it has received its fair share of criticism.
Adams argues that “ The vaccine is absolutely worthless as a medical treatment” and “ the so-called ‘science’ supporting the vaccine as the only prevention for cervical cancer is an outright fraud”. He explains that the people receiving the vaccine are being fooled by people working in the medical field that say the vaccine is by no means dangerous and persuades the audience that this is all a scam. One way to get his point across, Adams states that the vaccine has harmful substances and will cause harm, especially to young women. In Adams’ opinion cervical cancer can be dispersed from the human body permanently by multiple ways like receiving “adequate sunlight exposure and vitamin D consumption” along with other various methods. His belief also suggests that the drug companies and anyone who is affiliated with mandating the vaccine is corrupt and only care about money.
The HPV vaccine needs to generate money to actually sustain itself in the market. A conspiracy was made implying that the vaccine had a “dirty money connection” with the drug company Merck and Texas governor Rick Perry mandating the HPV vacc...

... middle of paper ...

...oval of drug companies and a few people, it shouldn’t be made mandatory until it has received a good amount of support. It also needs a profit to survive, otherwise it risk being diminished. It needs time before considering to be mandatory. That won’t be in the future though when people band together and approve the vaccine.
This debate is met with both audiences and is being met with improvements of the vaccine but is not quite present to receive the support of many to become mandatory. It does amazing things but its support and its achievements that were made aren’t big. If the government had the money to pay its price or just give it to the states to make it free is good and would actually progress its process of it becoming a mandating vaccine. What should be done as of now is to inform many more people of the situation so that it can receive proper attention.

Open Document