
COLLABORATING ORGANIZATIONS
The American Society Of Law, Medicine, And Ethics (
)

Bioethics Blog
(AJOB editors)
Bioethics Discussion Blog
(Maurice Bernstein)
Bioetica Latinoamericana
(Luis Justo)
Biopolitical Times
(Center for Genetics and Society)
Blogborygmi
(Nicholas Genes)
Envisioning 2.0
(Fard Johnmar)
Global Bioethics Blog
(Stuart Rennie)
Health Care Organizational Ethics
(Jim Sabin)
Medical Futility
(Thaddeus Pope)
Neuroethics & Law Blog
(Adam Kolber)
Not Dead Yet
(various)
patriciaEbauer.com
(Patricia E. Bauer)
Secondhand Smoke
(Wesley J. Smith)
Sufficient Scruples
(Kevin T. Keith)
Women’s Bioethics Blog
(various)
Anxiety, Addiction and Depression Treatments
(Patrick Coffee)
What is
Bioethics Forum?
Sign up for Bioethics Forum news and updates
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Choosing Paternalism?
BY KAREN J. MASCHKE
The controversy in the United States over whether to make HPV vaccination mandatory for preadolescent and adolescent girls has overlooked a more pressing global public health issue: the women and girls who need the vaccine the most do not live in the U.S.
The HPV vaccine protects against two types of the human papillomavirus, a common sexually transmitted infection that can lead to cervical cancer. This disease is relatively rare in the U.S., however. The American Cancer Society estimates that there will be 11,150 new cases of cervical cancer in the U.S. in 2007 and 3,670 deaths from the disease. In contrast, 95% of the nearly 260,000 deaths from cervical cancer in 2005 occurred in the developing world. Most of these deaths occurred in sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, and South America.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), cervical cancer deaths will rise by almost 25% over the next decade. Thus, the HPV vaccine is a welcome addition to the global fight against sexually transmitted infections and cervical cancer. Unfortunately, many obstacles prevent quick roll-out of the vaccine in developing countries. The most important of the obstacles are the vaccine’s high purchase and delivery costs. Other problems are the weak health and distribution infrastructures in developing countries and social and political forces that prevent women and girls from gaining access to health services. These obstacles have also hampered access to HIV/AIDS treatments in the developing world and may hinder quick roll-out of a future HIV/AIDS vaccine or microbicide.
How much the HPV vaccine will cost outside the U.S. is anyone’s guess, but it will not be cheap. For the U.S. market, the three-dose regimen is expected to cost about $360, a sum beyond the reach those in resource-poor countries. To this cost must be added expenses for needles and syringes, vaccine delivery and storage, and program administration. And even if developing countries could afford these costs, many of them lack the distribution mechanisms and health workers to administer the vaccine.
Several factors the WHO and other organizations have identified as contributing to the high cervical cancer death rate in developing countries must also be addressed. Many women, health care providers, and policymakers in these countries do not recognize cervical cancer as a health problem. Despite the increase in cervical cancer control programs in the developing world, some countries still have low-quality screening and follow-up programs, and some have no programs at all. And most women in these countries have limited access to any routine health care services.
Social and cultural norms in developing countries may discourage discussion and education about sexually transmitted infections and diseases affecting the genital tract. Yet greater awareness about HPV and cervical cancer helps little if women have no access to HPV and cancer screening. This screening will still be necessary even if they are vaccinated, since the HPV vaccine does not protect women against HPV types linked to approximately 30% of cervical cancers. Moreover, no data show whether the vaccine can prevent cervical cancer in women already infected with HPV or whether it will be effective beyond five years. That many women and adolescent girls in developing countries lack access to basic health services – including cervical cancer screening – makes implementing an immunization program all the more difficult.
Global health policymakers should take note of a key lesson from the HPV vaccine controversy in the U.S. Failure to identify and respond to societal concerns about vaccinating preteens and adolescent girls against sexually transmitted infections before a vaccine becomes available can lead to a backlash against an effective public health intervention. Matters of sexual health, sexuality, and sexually transmitted infections remain complex issues throughout the world because they often collide with social, cultural, and religious attitudes and beliefs.
Consent and privacy issues also complicate vaccine roll-out in developing countries. In the U.S., many state laws permit adolescents under age 18 to receive preventive services and treatments for sexually transmitted infections without parental consent. Because adolescent consent laws in developing countries may be more restrictive, effective strategies are needed to inform parents about the health benefits of the HPV vaccine and to explain to them that administering the vaccine does not imply that the adolescent is or should be sexually active, and that therefore vaccination to protect against cervical cancer should not be stigmatizing.
Several global health partnerships are working to lower the cost of the HPV vaccine, to facilitate local, regional, and global collaboration for vaccine delivery to developing countries, and to educate key audiences that HPV and cervical cancer are important global health concerns. Yet the difficulties encountered in providing affordable HIV/AIDS drugs to developing countries suggest that getting the HPV vaccine quickly to those who need it most presents a formidable challenge. It will take enormous commitment by governmental and nongovernmental global health organizations, women’s health advocates, finance ministries, and vaccine manufacturers to reverse the historical delays in introducing life-saving public health interventions to resource-poor countries.
Comments are sent to the forum moderator. Select responses may be posted.
A Phony 'War on Science'
Michael Gerson, Washington Post
“In their talk of a Republican war on science, liberals may be blinding themselves to a very different kind of modern war in which their own ideals are deeply implicated: a war on equality.”
It’s Not Immoral to Want to be Immortal
Arthur Caplan, MSNBC
“Despite a lot of hand-wringing and finger-pointing, it is not obvious that wanting to live a lot longer is evil or immoral.”
Science Is Leading Us to More Answers, but It's Also Misleading Us
David A. Shaywitz, Washington Post
“Consumers of scientific information must balance the hope we place in global biology with the skepticism this field has surely earned.”
Taking the Scary out of Breast Cancer Stats
Carol Tavris and Avrum Bluming, LA Times
“The media understand how deeply women fear breast cancer, and the result is that every study that seems to find a link between some new risk factor and the disease makes headlines everywhere.”
Dollars to Doughnuts Diagnosis
Albert Fuchs, LA Times
“Insurance doesn't make routine care affordable; it makes it more expensive by adding a middleman.”
Tainted Medicine
Jerome P. Kassirer, LA Times
“Disclosure of financial ties may give a scientist or researcher a clean conscience, but that doesn't erase the possibility of a conflict.”
Children's health can't be left to faith alone
Arthur Caplan, MSNBC
“Parents do not have the right to watch a child wither away while they pray.”
Transplant List Numbers Raise Doubts
Arthur Caplan, MSNBC
“The American people have a right to expect absolute honesty about the number of people waiting for a transplant at any time.”
An Epidemic No One Wants to Talk About
Robert E. Fullilove et al., Washington Post
“Simply put, we will never rid the United States of HIV and other STDs if our only weapon is medical treatment.”
Making Cells Like Computers
Erik Parens, Boston Globe
“Conceivably, we are on the verge of installing synthetic genomes in bacterial cells to create products we want. But we are still a long, long way from doing what most people mean by ‘synthesizing life.’”
Miracle Workers?
David Rieff, New York Times Magazine
“Even today, the oldest of all relations between patient and physician — that of supplicant to shaman — continues to exert its authority.”
Overselling Overmedication
Judith Warner, NYTimes.com
“Most of the critics decrying the over-medicalization of the American mind rest their arguments upon the bedrock assumption that people who have nothing wrong with them are being medicated for largely fictitious concerns.”
Ads Spur Urge for Drugs
David Lazarus, LA Times
“DTC advertising has turned prescription drugs into just another gotta-have-it consumer product.”
Food Politics, Half-Baked
James E. McWilliams, New York Times
“Lost in this rhetorical battle was a quiet middle ground where the benefits and drawbacks of genetically engineered crops were responsibly considered.”
Perpetrating the Autism Myth
Benjamin Kruskal and Carole Allen, Boston Globe
“The scientific evidence is clear: neither the MMR vaccine nor thimerosal (mercury) in vaccines has any relationship to autism.”
Closing the Barn Door After the Cows Have Gotten Out
Verlyn Klinkenborg, New York Times
“The real beneficiaries are the nation’s large meatpacking companies — the kind that would like it best if chickens grew in the shape of nuggets.”
Human Embryos Cloned: What Does It Mean?
Art Caplan, MSNBC
“Let's not be frightened by scare tactics into not funding research that may be the key to curing what is currently incurable.”
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Is Bad Policy for Cloned Food
Art Caplan, MSNBC
“All of this fear-mongering about clones has made Americans forget that cloning is nothing more than artificially creating twins.”