Originally posted by Crakeur
as there is nothing to do if she does have it.

If cancer cells are found in the cervix to avoid spread the area is scraped and burned.

That is one of the treatments when is already in the cervix, that is what my friend treatment was, this was back in the early eighties and we were young women then starting families she was only 19 at the time.

I hope your wife and you are researching on this matter, I would be all over the internet looking for information.

learning about this things help take away the worries.

the virus can lead to cancer as well as warts and a slew of other nasty things. she has none of that. just the virus so she is now going to be screened regularly for cancer cells.

It is a very confusing issue, vaccines I mean. I have a degree in molecular Bio and Im still on the fence with how I feel about most of them. I don’t bother with flu vaccines at all and luckily I have boys so this is not so much an in my face issue with the HPV vaccine. I think if I did though I would wait several years to see if there are any lasting effects before vaccinating a daughter. Im not sure i trust any "new" drugs.

Originally posted by Crakeur
the virus can lead to cancer as well as warts and a slew of other nasty things. she has none of that. just the virus so she is now going to be screened regularly for cancer cells.

the good thing is that they caught it very early so in the future if they do find some cancer cells or precancer cells they will just do a LEEP procedure to remove them. the important thing is that now she knows she HAS to go regularly to get the dreaded PAP.

yup, that is the good thing, especially since they say hers is the rarer variant. truth is, I'm not sure if the data can all be trusted at the moment but there is no harm in more frequent screenings. It's like breast exams for breast cancer. it doesn't hurt to do it and the early catch can save a life. why wouldn't every woman do it?

double post

my bad

[edit on 16-3-2007 by Crakeur]

Oh come on, surely you're not that stupid. Are you?

[edit on 16-3-2007 by kegs]

not that stupid for thinking women should be screened for things like cervical cancer that are somewhat more common than, say, liver cancer?

Innoculations can NEVER be made mandatory... Unless they put a 9 to your head.



They try that total BS in Washington state. School admins will try to bully/just lie to your face... But they CAN NOT keep your child out of school.

And it really pisses them off when you ask them... 'If all of the other kids are innoculated... What exactly are you worried about?'

It's like something right out of a Monty Python skit...



Just give them the old religious belief.

Yeah, like innoculations prevent disease... Please!!!

Is it TOO rude of me to point out that if this innoculation worked... it would certainly help women who have CC (from HPV)?

People simply refuse to understand that CANCER is a disease of self-toxicity.

You clean up the toxicity and the disease typically just goes away.

Doesn't matter what MD treatment you try, it ISN'T going to cure you...

You simply haven't addressed the ROOT PROBLEM.

None of the MD processes (chemo (read poisoning you), surgery (read cutting out body parts), robbery (read stealing your money), vaccines (read falsified test data)) do anything with regards to cancer.

I haven't had the opportunity to help anyone with CC (which is REALLY weird when you think about it... at least for me... )...

>Dont blame big pharma. Blame the FDA.

Sure... The FDA is FOR SALE.



But... BUT... Big Pharma are the architects of this cult of death by guys with labs coats and prescriptions pads.

To the tune of BILLIONS and BILLIONS and BILLIONS...

How many people has Big Pharma killed just with 'cholesterol' control? How many people has Big Pharma TOTALLY trashed their livers curing a 'disease' that SIMPLY DOES NOT EXIST.

High 'cholesterol' is NOT a disease. It is an absolute fabrication... and there are literally dozens of TOTALLY phony diseases...

Like 'reflux' disease (which is sold to the gullible pill popping public as 'excess acid' when the REALITY is it's a LACK of acid (coupled with a breakdown of the protective lining of the stomach)).

It's just a reason... sold as a need (to the public)... to buy drugs... Like RLS.

(It is SO not funny )

I never do the flu shot. I barely get sick with stuff like that.

Dad gets the flu shot every year, and soon after gets sick.

My nephew and nieces got the flu shot, but they still got the flu.

I just don't have that much trust in the drug companies. Give me a reason to.

Troy

Originally posted by Jessicamsa
The shot is already in KY. I refused to let them inject it in my daughter.

We only have their word that a virus causes cancer don't we? Where is the proof of this? And if it's been known for years, why wait until a year before a profit making 'mandatory' vaccination is introduced to inform the public?

my mom had it. she had to have her uterus and ovaries removed. is that proof enough for you?

oh and about the vaccines being mandatory and stuff..i haven't gotten most of my shots and the schools never said anything about it. and i'm perfectly healthy. I haven't had a flu shot in many many years while the rest of my family rushes to get them as soon as they come in and i'm always the one that doesn't get sick.

[edit on 17-3-2007 by lizziex3]

My daughter is 9 years old, and I'm very concerned with the new "rights not allowed" mandatory acts policy our government is adopting. If they sent home a permission slip and information packet, parents could elect or at least "opt-out" of the program. When the kid is 18, then they can choose to get it if they haven't before. Here's a novel idea about STD's. If you don't want them, don't have sex. Caveat Emptor, know the medical history of your spouse before the honeymoon (not "partner for a night"). Instead of spending money on blanket inoculations, how about putting the money towards curing the actual problem? I've talked to people who believe we have a cure for cancer and are covering it up. I disagree, but this instance puts a point in their favor. "There's more money to be made in the treatment than the cure", as they say. This is a precursor to chip implants and/or marking the hand or forehead to buy and sell things.

[edit on 17-3-2007 by saint4God]

It's of an interesting note: the drug induced scandal is unraveling as it unfolds within the court systems.

We had an event here in my state where a nurse practitioner administered something she clearly should not have. It was, in factual evidencing, terminal. This event has caused a money cascade in which the advisory hospital is looking at figures that number at least 9 in length.

The whole of the lies perpetrated, what with them guesstimating the length of termination in comparison, has caused a major shift in legal views. It's a hairy event, to say the least.

Also, what I find ama(u)zing, her motive was its ineffectiveness on another individual. This, BTW, is a Capital Murder Trial.

Originally posted by lizziex3
my mom had it. she had to have her uterus and ovaries removed. is that proof enough for you?

Yes that is the problem once the cancer cells are found they just spread, my friend that had the first procedure done with the scraping and burning, after her second child the cancer cells came back she was advised to have a hysterectomy and she did.

That is the last measure to save a life.

The virus alone is not enough for a drastic measure, just when cancer cells develop.

[edit on 17-3-2007 by marg6043]

This whole thing makes no sense to me at all. They told me I had it after I had my 2nd child. Ended up having a LEEP done. They told me that it was no big deal at all, that most women have it, and it usually develops into precancerous cells ie warts, that is when they cut that part off and all is well.

So, my question has to do with how a woman gets the virus to begin with. Why is it I didnt get it until after I had a child, and then never got it again even though I have been with the same man the entire time (almost 10 years now). If it was truely sexually transmited, that would not be the case.

My daughter will not be getting this vaccine. Nor will she or any of my other children be getting the other new vaccines the dr.s keep trying to talk me into. I am still upset about the chicken pox vaccine. My oldest was one of the first to get it. Him and most of the kids I know his age, got the chicken pox at least 3 times after that.

[edit on 17-3-2007 by mrsdudara]

mrsdudara

That's the question, my friend had the first cancer cells after her first child was born, then after the procedure done to her, they she had none.

The comeback after her second child.

But before her first child she never had a negative pap.

I don't get it.

And when it comes to the virus it seems that women can have it all their lives without becoming cancer.

What I will like to know is what triggers some women to become more suggestible to turn into cancer when others don't.

And in cases like the women I am familiar with in my family never have been diagnosed with it.

It has to do with the body itself I guess and the ability to fight this.

So how a vaccine is going to stop cells from developing into cancer? when some woman just develop cancer without been diagnosed with the virus first.



You are right some of this issues makes no sense.

Originally posted by mrsdudara
My daughter will not be getting this vaccine. Nor will she or any of my other children be getting the other new vaccines the dr.s keep trying to talk me into. I am still upset about the chicken pox vaccine. My oldest was one of the first to get it. Him and most of the kids I know his age, got the chicken pox at least 3 times after that.

You've made a very good point here. Vaccines do not guarentee not getting the virus, only try to encourage the body to build up antibodies against them. I do not get the flu shot for that reason, and also the flu changes at such a fast rate, it's never the same bug twice.

Exactly. My daughter for instance, she does not cope well with the vaccines. She gets all the side affects. Its a real bugger when she gets multiple vaccines at the same time, she was sick for over a week after her MMR and the pox vaccines. WHY would ANYONE want to give this virus even in the form of a vaccine to a CHILD when the side effect is CANCER????? I will guarantee that if they tell me my child can not go to school because she has not had it, then I will homeschool her.

Pardon my loss of memory, I cant remember who said it, but the one who mentioned teaching kids about abstance, and protected sex had it right. I really think that the government finding ways to protect my kids from STD's is going a bit far into the none of your business catagory.

Im not messing around when it comes to my children, especially their reproductive organs. as my 3 year old would say "NO WAY DUDE"

Originally posted by mrsdudara
Exactly. My daughter for instance, she does not cope well with the vaccines. She gets all the side affects. Its a real bugger when she gets multiple vaccines at the same time, she was sick for over a week after her MMR and the pox vaccines. WHY would ANYONE want to give this virus even in the form of a vaccine to a CHILD when the side effect is CANCER????? I will guarantee that if they tell me my child can not go to school because she has not had it, then I will homeschool her.

Pardon my loss of memory, I cant remember who said it, but the one who mentioned teaching kids about abstance, and protected sex had it right. I really think that the government finding ways to protect my kids from STD's is going a bit far into the none of your business catagory.

Im not messing around when it comes to my children, especially their reproductive organs. as my 3 year old would say "NO WAY DUDE"

Agree whole heartdly.
Awesome post